Leak your school's OCI data here Forum

[hubtubrub]

wtf. there are too many anonymous sources on this thread.

[rayiner]

In other news...Ray, I know you said NU had emailed the student body in the wake of OCI with a rough figure. I'm assuming they haven't updated the employment statistics? I know in April when I sat down with career services they said they were still consolidating their data.

Our data was last updated in July '09, so I presume in a couple of months we'd get a more recent update.

[Anonymous User]

I'm a rising 3L at Michigan, and I just checked the 2008 and 2009 GPA data for OCI. It seems like they only updated some of the firms (some firms' offer counts clearly went up). The firm I am working at this summer (DC firm) has not been updated. The number of offers made by my firm (as listed on the GPA form) is the same in 2008 and 2009. But I know they extended at least 2 offers in 2009, since there are 2 Michigan students working at my firm this summer.

I'm just saying that counting the differences in offers is going to yield incomplete data, because obviously they are missing some offers.

[Anonymous User]

And the Michigan data is based on a survey they send out to students. I very much doubt that anywhere near 100% of students actually answered the survey.

[underdawg]

And the Michigan data is based on a survey they send out to students. I very much doubt that anywhere near 100% of students actually answered the survey.

so are all these stats, no? at my school, i think there's some sort of consequence if you don't fill it out.

[Anonymous User]

And the Michigan data is based on a survey they send out to students. I very much doubt that anywhere near 100% of students actually answered the survey.

Yeah. This is stupid. First you have to fill out. And then months later they send you another email asking you to give permission to reveal your employment online. I totally forgot to give permission the second time, so my job isn't even on that list.

OCS sends an updated list some time later in the summer to 2Ls for bidding strategies at OCI. There is no available list yet though, at least not for OCI purposes.

So it is pretty retarded to speculate. That list is not updated. And no, OCS has not sent out any official list.

I don't think any school has released an official list, except for Columbia...and that other one.

Also, everyone I know on law review has a firm job...don't know why people are speaking out of their asses.

[Anonymous User]

Re: UVA. Too many people bid on DC and it was a shitfest (i.e. top 30%) at least according to my friend.

[Anonymous User]

Yeah. This is stupid. First you have to fill out. And then months later they send you another email asking you to give permission to reveal your employment online. I totally forgot to give permission the second time, so my job isn't even on that list.

Taken directly from the PDF:

OCS bases the data on National Association for Law Placement surveys that the employers complete. If an employer did not return the surveys, results will not appear in the Employer Qualifications Profiles.

So wait... who's talking out of their ass now?


And also, the notion that some firms hadn't been updated was also conceded earlier (though the V10 data is complete, which is what allowed me to make the comparison btw that and CLS on that level).

And also, apparently rayiner doesn't know what a conditional statement is:

If there were 260 total offers, that's 130 people, or just over a third of the class. If the number of offers/accept is more than two that number goes even lower.

...and thinks they should be supplemented with an explicit caveat.

My goodness the people here. Anyways, off to work.

[hubtubrub]

Re: UVA. Too many people bid on DC and it was a shitfest (i.e. top 30%) at least according to my friend.

UVA hasn't released their data... so I have know idea what you are talking about.

[rayiner]

Yeah. This is stupid. First you have to fill out. And then months later they send you another email asking you to give permission to reveal your employment online. I totally forgot to give permission the second time, so my job isn't even on that list.

Taken directly from the PDF:

OCS bases the data on National Association for Law Placement surveys that the employers complete. If an employer did not return the surveys, results will not appear in the Employer Qualifications Profiles.

So wait... who's talking out of their ass now?


And also, the notion that some firms hadn't been updated was also conceded earlier (though the V10 data is complete, which is what allowed me to make the comparison btw that and CLS on that level).

And also, apparently rayiner doesn't know what a conditional statement is:

If there were 260 total offers, that's 130 people, or just over a third of the class. If the number of offers/accept is more than two that number goes even lower.

...and thinks they should be supplemented with an explicit caveat.

My goodness the people here. Anyways, off to work.

There are two caveats: 1) the 260 figure is uncertain, 2) the 130 figure is uncertain. Someone came to the OP's defense and claimed the original post was marked as speculative, but that's not the case at all. If you wanna argue about "conditional statements" - the post has two sources of uncertainty and one conditional. But that's not even the point - the tone was far more confident of the conjecture than the data warranted.

[RisingMichigan3L]

But that's not even the point - the tone was far more confident of the conjecture than the data warranted.

Your interpretation of the tone is subjective. I guess you don't know what a conditional is. Others here, I hope, do.

Besides:

Since people seem to have by and large backed off on the point I see no reason to pursue the issue further.

I guess you do have an ego to stroke.

I'm not really here to argue. I think you have a legitimate general point about making statements appear as fact. I'm just astonished (a) that you think that's the case here, and (b) that you're willing to argue vigorously (and get hot and bothered) that your subjective belief in the statement's tone is actually the case.

Anyways, for a guy who seems to understand when threads become meaningless, you seem awfully ignorant now. We've been on a meaningless conversational track for a while now, and I am willing to bet that I am merely posts away from initiating a meaningless debate on when statements begin to have a confident tone, thus allowing us to show off our linguistic talent and further stroke our egos. What's even funnier is that I am reasonably confident you'd follow me on that meaningless track, if I pursued it.

And PS, you do have a horse in this race. You don't go to Michigan, sure. But you go to a school whose biglaw placement is on par with Michigan's, and therefore, their OCI success likely tells much about your OCI's success. I'm not saying you're actually thinking this, but don't think that your hands are completely clean.

Cheers, bud. Have a beer or some other drink. Just stop posting here. There are many, many more important things to worry about than whether a post was too confident-sounding so as to mislead posters.

[Anonymous User]

Original Michigan poster here.

Walking around Michigan this past semester asking fellow 2Ls what they were doing this summer was like 1L year - nothing or public interest dominated. The 30-40% idea is about what I've experienced anecdotally. I think a good amount of this was due to OCS' conservative-bidding idea as well as their Chicago pushing - after all the OCI dropouts, I don't think there were even 30 Chicago firms (non-IP).

It wasn't a strict GPA cutoff either. I know plenty of people above 3.5 with no jobs (none of which concentrated on NYC - mostly Chicago/SoCal). I know people around and slightly below the median that got at least one offer, even in Chicago. I know people around 3.5 with several callbacks, and people around 3.5 with one.

It was a pretty shitty time.

[Core]

This thread is informative but a bit questionable.
Anyone have reliable data for Penn?

[underachiever]

This thread is informative but a bit questionable.
Anyone have reliable data for Penn?

We are honest folks down here, we don't leak information that isn't meant to be available for public consumption, unlike some schools, lol.

Honestly, we have a ton of data, charts and such but I haven't looked at any of it.... in-between drinking and doing nothing....my casual TLS cellphone viewing is as close to law school as I have come in awhile (outside of writing comp)

[wiseowl]

But that's not even the point - the tone was far more confident of the conjecture than the data warranted.

Your interpretation of the tone is subjective. I guess you don't know what a conditional is. Others here, I hope, do.

Besides:

Since people seem to have by and large backed off on the point I see no reason to pursue the issue further.

I guess you do have an ego to stroke.

I'm not really here to argue. I think you have a legitimate general point about making statements appear as fact. I'm just astonished (a) that you think that's the case here, and (b) that you're willing to argue vigorously (and get hot and bothered) that your subjective belief in the statement's tone is actually the case.

Anyways, for a guy who seems to understand when threads become meaningless, you seem awfully ignorant now. We've been on a meaningless conversational track for a while now, and I am willing to bet that I am merely posts away from initiating a meaningless debate on when statements begin to have a confident tone, thus allowing us to show off our linguistic talent and further stroke our egos. What's even funnier is that I am reasonably confident you'd follow me on that meaningless track, if I pursued it.

And PS, you do have a horse in this race. You don't go to Michigan, sure. But you go to a school whose biglaw placement is on par with Michigan's, and therefore, their OCI success likely tells much about your OCI's success. I'm not saying you're actually thinking this, but don't think that your hands are completely clean.

Cheers, bud. Have a beer or some other drink. Just stop posting here. There are many, many more important things to worry about than whether a post was too confident-sounding so as to mislead posters.

you've only made 30 posts here and you've been a bitter-sounding dick in most of them. congrats.

[BradyToMoss]

Ran through the list OCS provides us with at USC for students who got summer jobs with OCI employers the past two years. I counted 73 2Ls from the Class of '11 with SA gigs from OCI firms. The previous year (2009 Summers from Class of '10) had 89.

Class of 2010 is a bit smaller, 182 students as opposed to 203 students. It seems USC wasn't hit quite as hard as some other schools (49% down to 36%), but still a significant drop off.

They don't provide us with total # of students participating in OCI (anecdotely I'd guess 95%+ participate), and I have a couple friends not listed who got jobs in January/February so the list must not be fully up to date.

[Anonymous User]

that's actually mighty impressive. interesting.

i remember reading on xo, in the days leading to OCI, that employers at GPA had dramatically increased their GPA cutoffs (like... to 3.6). Led me to believe that the bloodbath was going to be bad.

[Anonymous User]

GULC #s from last summer, according to OCS -

1) "Right around" 70% of summer associates (c/o 2010) got offers (around NALP avg)
2) "Right around" 50% of OCI participants (c/o 2011) landed SA positions

Who knows how accurate those numbers are, but take it FWIW. Despite the general negative feelings towards OCS on TLS, they've been pretty up front with me.

[TrampsLikeU$]

According to Duke career services handout, about 62-65% of the class got SA gigs.

V10: 10-11%, V20: 17-18%, V50: 29-31%, V100: 37-39%.

Note that the estimates are because there seemed to be at least a handful people who didn't report, but I'm not sure how big the 2L class is because of the addition of transfers.

No info on which offers came from OCI, but I would imagine most of the V100 as well as about 10% more that are market-rate firms from places that usually come to OCI. So probably somewhere in the range of 45%.

Average starting salary for the firm jobs= $135k (estimated- I looked them up on NALP and other sites, and guessed 50k for the firms that had no information).

[profs<3mycomments]

Whoa, I have been following this thread waiting for it to get really good, but instead it got really bad.

[Hitachi]

All of the people I know who got (near)-market firms outside of OCI got Vault firms, so that seems an unwarranted assumption.

[Anonymous User]

The assumption was that the number is trivial, not that it's 0...

[miamiman]

According to Duke career services handout, about 62-65% of the class got SA gigs.

V10: 10-11%, V20: 17-18%, V50: 29-31%, V100: 37-39%.

Note that the estimates are because there seemed to be at least a handful people who didn't report, but I'm not sure how big the 2L class is because of the addition of transfers.

No info on which offers came from OCI, but I would imagine most of the V100 as well as about 10% more that are market-rate firms from places that usually come to OCI. So probably somewhere in the range of 45%.

Average starting salary for the firm jobs= $135k (estimated- I looked them up on NALP and other sites, and guessed 50k for the firms that had no information).

so 65% got SAs but only 40% are within the V100. what are the other 25% then?

[thatsnotmyname]

According to Duke career services handout, about 62-65% of the class got SA gigs.

V10: 10-11%, V20: 17-18%, V50: 29-31%, V100: 37-39%.

Wow, this sounds a lot better than what we've heard from Mich and the little we've heard about UVA... Is Duke's small class size a major asset ITE?

[RisingMichigan3L]

so 65% got SAs but only 40% are within the V100. what are the other 25% then?

...there are big firms outside the V100.