Official Georgetown EA thread Forum

[mjs1187]

The only real factors are lawl skool grades and the lawl skool.

LOR's, PS and other stuff, can hurt you if they are terrible, but they would have to really be amazing to help.

This isn't really correct. For better or worse, transfer decisions are not the hard numbers games that 1L admissions are, so the softs are more important in differentiating candidates. And LOR's are more significant for transfers because they're written by law professors rather than a TTT undergrad prof in a TTT major. Something to keep in mind.

Also, 95% of transfer students on here have said basically the opposite of this.

I think softs might make a difference in this economy. Maybe 75% numbers 25% softs? I dont know. It is really hard to quantify how much each category is weighted. Jobs are extremely hard to get, even at Georgetown. I was thinking that having a summer position at a firm might help your chances.
What do you cats think?

I hope so - I have a real sweet summer gig.

[Wooster33]

Also, 95% of transfer students on here have said basically the opposite of this.

Certainly grades are more important, but you don't have the USNEWS factor making it a hard numbers game. So I would say that grades are more of a gatekeeper, they are acceptable or not. If there is a top 3% kid and a top 5% kid from the same school, they are going to take the one with good recommendations even if it means taking the top 5% instead of the top 3%. I don't think the same can be said for, say, a two LSAT point difference in 1L admissions, especially late in the game when they are trying to move medians. If your recommendations read like unethusiastic form letters and your softs leave something to be desired, it's going to be a handicap (and it's going to matter more as a transfer because US News is not a factor). Why kid yourself?

Interesting, I don't really get the argument about LOR's. Im positive that my U-grad profs from a TTT major and school, knew me much better, and spent far more time then my lawl skool profs did writing the letters. I dont really see the value in getting a letter from someone more prestigious that knew you for one semester.

Also I stand by that Grades and lawl skool are the only factors. Yeah incredible softs can help, but most of us don't have those anyways. Really if you look at the limited data and statement by law schools, the only consistent feature really is class rank and school rank.

Law school admissions, both 1L and transfer, are supposed to be about predicting law school performance. Character and all that jazz matters, but it is secondary. A TTT communications or feminist lit prof know jack shit about the study of law or how to spot legal talent. Law professors do. And of course there is the natural bias and deference toward one of their own.

[Wooster33]

I think softs might make a difference in this economy. Maybe 75% numbers 25% softs? I dont know. It is really hard to quantify how much each category is weighted. Jobs are extremely hard to get, even at Georgetown. I was thinking that having a summer position at a firm might help your chances.
What do you cats think?

Are we talking employment or transfer admissions? I think firm work is the best you can do to improve your chances at further firm positions, but that's just my take.

As to transfer admission, I don't think it matters if it's at an elite firm, and to the academics and do-gooders reading your file, a lot of decent unpaid stuff is probably preferrable (judicial internship, respectable non-profit, etc.). However, it really is essential you do something legally related because it communicates your interest in the law (for both future employment and transfer admissions).

[A'nold]

Edit: only applicable for April Fool's day.

[thexfactor]

I think softs might make a difference in this economy. Maybe 75% numbers 25% softs? I dont know. It is really hard to quantify how much each category is weighted. Jobs are extremely hard to get, even at Georgetown. I was thinking that having a summer position at a firm might help your chances.
What do you cats think?

Are we talking employment or transfer admissions? I think firm work is the best you can do to improve your chances at further firm positions, but that's just my take.

As to transfer admission, I don't think it matters if it's at an elite firm, and to the academics and do-gooders reading your file, a lot of decent unpaid stuff is probably preferrable (judicial internship, respectable non-profit, etc.). However, it really is essential you do something legally related because it communicates your interest in the law (for both future employment and transfer admissions).

Well I was just thinking that in the normal law school ap game, the usnews cares a lot about GPA and LSAT. The schools then seem to try to boost those numbers to get the highest rank possible. In the transfer game, the only number that could effect the rankings is the employment %. I was thinking that because it is so hard to get a 1L (firm) summer position, getting a position your first year shows that you are "employable." It makes it likely that you could potentially boost their employment statistics, which in turn could boost the school's ranking.

[A'nold]

I think softs might make a difference in this economy. Maybe 75% numbers 25% softs? I dont know. It is really hard to quantify how much each category is weighted. Jobs are extremely hard to get, even at Georgetown. I was thinking that having a summer position at a firm might help your chances.
What do you cats think?

Are we talking employment or transfer admissions? I think firm work is the best you can do to improve your chances at further firm positions, but that's just my take.

As to transfer admission, I don't think it matters if it's at an elite firm, and to the academics and do-gooders reading your file, a lot of decent unpaid stuff is probably preferrable (judicial internship, respectable non-profit, etc.). However, it really is essential you do something legally related because it communicates your interest in the law (for both future employment and transfer admissions).

Well I was just thinking that in the normal lawl skool ap game, the usnews cares a lot about GPA and LSAT. The schools then seem to try to boost those numbers to get the highest rank possible. In the transfer game, the only number that could effect the rankings is the employment %. I was thinking that because it is so hard to get a 1L (firm) summer position, getting a position your first year shows that you are "employable." It makes it likely that you could potentially boost their employment statistics, which in turn could boost the school's ranking.

No, getting a 1L paid summer internship shows that you knew somebody.

[Wooster33]

I have always heard that there isn't very much movement at all, especially within the top 5-10%. Any evidence here?

My experience was there was significant movement. I'd guess maybe 3 or 4 of the top ten students fell out of the top 10, some even out of the top ten percent (from top 2%-ish).

Maybe that is atyptical, but I don't know why it would be--it's a single semester. Some people get lucky, for others their effort really slacks off (or increases). One grade, or even a + or - can move a student significantly up or down with just one semester on the books. What's a plus worth in a 3 credit class, .1 GPA? That's huge, a single difference in a grade in a single class is .2 GPA! So you neglect one topic and it happens to be on the exam, instead of the A you get a B, and now you're stuck with a 3.4 instead of a 3.6. That's probably a 10%+ fall at most schools. So you can begin to see how one semester isn't a representative sample, that being luck or unlucky (or really gunning or slacking) can really make a difference.

[Wooster33]

Well I was just thinking that in the normal lawl skool ap game, the usnews cares a lot about GPA and LSAT. The schools then seem to try to boost those numbers to get the highest rank possible. In the transfer game, the only number that could effect the rankings is the employment %. I was thinking that because it is so hard to get a 1L (firm) summer position, getting a position your first year shows that you are "employable." It makes it likely that you could potentially boost their employment statistics, which in turn could boost the school's ranking.

Interesting thought. Certainly rational. I doubt it factors in much as a ranking consideration though. The schools do want productive students who will make a name for themselves and be good alumni and make contributions. So they're going to want to see ambition, drive, and all that, whether it be directed at firm work or non-profit. Nevertheless, interesting point.

[thexfactor]

I think softs might make a difference in this economy. Maybe 75% numbers 25% softs? I dont know. It is really hard to quantify how much each category is weighted. Jobs are extremely hard to get, even at Georgetown. I was thinking that having a summer position at a firm might help your chances.
What do you cats think?

Are we talking employment or transfer admissions? I think firm work is the best you can do to improve your chances at further firm positions, but that's just my take.

As to transfer admission, I don't think it matters if it's at an elite firm, and to the academics and do-gooders reading your file, a lot of decent unpaid stuff is probably preferrable (judicial internship, respectable non-profit, etc.). However, it really is essential you do something legally related because it communicates your interest in the law (for both future employment and transfer admissions).

Well I was just thinking that in the normal lawl skool ap game, the usnews cares a lot about GPA and LSAT. The schools then seem to try to boost those numbers to get the highest rank possible. In the transfer game, the only number that could effect the rankings is the employment %. I was thinking that because it is so hard to get a 1L (firm) summer position, getting a position your first year shows that you are "employable." It makes it likely that you could potentially boost their employment statistics, which in turn could boost the school's ranking.

No, getting a 1L paid summer internship shows that you knew somebody.

Just because you "knew" someone doesnt mean that you aren't qualified. I "knew" someone at the firm where I am working at this summer, but I still had to go through the same application and interview channels as everyone else.

[kings84_wr]

Just to clarify, because im not extremely familiar with US News rankings, but doesn't employment only factor into the percent employed after grad? So thus a job at Mcdonalds is the same as working for Wachtell?

also Im still not buying the softs matter very much. Transferapps group and just about every transfer student here, have said class rank is basically all of it.

[A'nold]

I have always heard that there isn't very much movement at all, especially within the top 5-10%. Any evidence here?

My experience was there was significant movement. I'd guess maybe 3 or 4 of the top ten students fell out of the top 10, some even out of the top ten percent (from top 2%-ish).

Maybe that is atyptical, but I don't know why it would be--it's a single semester. Some people get lucky, for others their effort really slacks off (or increases). One grade, or even a + or - can move a student significantly up or down with just one semester on the books. What's a plus worth in a 3 credit class, .1 GPA? That's huge, a single difference in a grade in a single class is .2 GPA! So you neglect one topic and it happens to be on the exam, instead of the A you get a B, and now you're stuck with a 3.4 instead of a 3.6. That's probably a 10%+ fall at most schools. So you can begin to see how one semester isn't a representative sample, that being luck or unlucky (or really gunning or slacking) can really make a difference.

Sorry dude, but I would say you are generally wrong on this one, barring unusual circumstances. People that get across the board great grades 1st semester are doing something right, the people below them less so. Even some other students improve, it is unlikely that the student that got great grades last semester is going to do any worse. Their high rank stays the same or gets better. Say that a student has a 3.8 and another student has a 3.3. The 3.3 student completely owns second semester and crushes the 3.8 kid by pulling straight A's and the 3.8 kid gets a 3.7. He'd still have a superior GPA and dude beat him by .4. It's really hard for people to catch up and unless the 3.8 guy's GPA was a COMPLETE fluke (which is actually almost impossible considering the high cum. GPA).

[A'nold]

Are we talking employment or transfer admissions? I think firm work is the best you can do to improve your chances at further firm positions, but that's just my take.

As to transfer admission, I don't think it matters if it's at an elite firm, and to the academics and do-gooders reading your file, a lot of decent unpaid stuff is probably preferrable (judicial internship, respectable non-profit, etc.). However, it really is essential you do something legally related because it communicates your interest in the law (for both future employment and transfer admissions).

Well I was just thinking that in the normal lawl skool ap game, the usnews cares a lot about GPA and LSAT. The schools then seem to try to boost those numbers to get the highest rank possible. In the transfer game, the only number that could effect the rankings is the employment %. I was thinking that because it is so hard to get a 1L (firm) summer position, getting a position your first year shows that you are "employable." It makes it likely that you could potentially boost their employment statistics, which in turn could boost the school's ranking.

No, getting a 1L paid summer internship shows that you knew somebody.

Just because you "knew" someone doesnt mean that you aren't qualified. I "knew" someone at the firm where I am working at this summer, but I still had to go through the same application and interview channels as everyone else.

I'm sure you are a great interviewer and seem like a good guy, but I am telling you there is a 99% chance you would not have landed that job without connections. I ranked above everybody but couldn't even get an interview and there are students here at median that got paid 1L summer work....through connections.

Look at TLS'ers like JazzOne that was basically #1 at a t17 school and didn't land a 1L gig and tons of others below him did, based entirely on connections. 2L is a different story.

[Wooster33]

Sorry dude, but I would say you are generally wrong on this one, barring unusual circumstances. People that get across the board great grades 1st semester are doing something right, the people below them less so. Even some other students improve, it is unlikely that the student that got great grades last semester is going to do any worse. Their high rank stays the same or gets better. Say that a student has a 3.8 and another student has a 3.3. The 3.3 student completely owns second semester and crushes the 3.8 kid by pulling straight A's and the 3.8 kid gets a 3.7. He'd still have a superior GPA and dude beat him by .4. It's really hard for people to catch up and unless the 3.8 guy's GPA was a COMPLETE fluke (which is actually almost impossible considering the high cum. GPA).

All good points. But one semester is an incredibly small sample size. A guy who ordinarily pulls a 3.8, through bad luck or minor slacking can easily swing a 3.6 (that is the difference of ONE grade in a single class). And while it's true that a 3.2 isn't likely to jump to a 3.8, it isn't unheard of (I personally know people who have improved that much and fallen that much). I do agree that MOST students in the top 10% don't move significantly, but a sizable minority does, and that is important to keep in mind. Don't get complacent. You used the example of a 3.3 going to a 4.0 for a reason. What is more likely to happen is the kid who gets a 3.6 one semeter gets a 3.8, while the 3.8 gets a 3.5. Suddenly a kid who was 10 percentile behind you is now ahead of you by a couple! You're kidding yourself if you don't think this happens on a regular basis. Just because the median kid can't catch you doesn't mean the top quarter can't.

[A'nold]

Sorry dude, but I would say you are generally wrong on this one, barring unusual circumstances. People that get across the board great grades 1st semester are doing something right, the people below them less so. Even some other students improve, it is unlikely that the student that got great grades last semester is going to do any worse. Their high rank stays the same or gets better. Say that a student has a 3.8 and another student has a 3.3. The 3.3 student completely owns second semester and crushes the 3.8 kid by pulling straight A's and the 3.8 kid gets a 3.7. He'd still have a superior GPA and dude beat him by .4. It's really hard for people to catch up and unless the 3.8 guy's GPA was a COMPLETE fluke (which is actually almost impossible considering the high cum. GPA).

All good points. But one semester is an incredibly small sample size. A guy who ordinarily pulls a 3.8, through bad luck or minor slacking can easily swing a 3.6 (that is the difference of ONE grade in a single class). And while it's true that a 3.2 isn't likely to jump to a 3.8, it isn't unheard of (I personally know people who have improved that much and fallen that much). I do agree that MOST students in the top 10% don't move significantly, but a sizable minority does, and that is important to keep in mind. Don't get complacent. You used the example of a 3.3 going to a 4.0 for a reason. What is more likely to happen is the kid who gets a 3.6 one semeter gets a 3.8, while the 3.8 gets a 3.5. Suddenly a kid who was 10 percentile behind you is now ahead of you by a couple! You're kidding yourself if you don't think this happens on a regular basis. Just because the median kid can't catch you doesn't mean the top quarter can't.

I get what you're saying, but in order for it to be scary enough to worry about it (I worry b/c I'm paranoid, not b/c of the odds), at least like 50% of the 25-10% students would have to absolutely CRUSH it and 50% of the top 10% would have to do considerably worse, on average, than they've already proven they can do.

The point I'm really trying to make is that it is no mere coincidence or just lack of competition that the top 10% are the top 10%. There is a large difference b/w an A and a B, and if you are an A- average kind of student, it just seems unlikely that you will turn into a B, B+ kind of student when it is obvious that you were doing something right on exams the first time around.

In my experience, it seems like most students are trying less hard this semester, but it could be a school-specific phenomenon.

[Wooster33]

I feel like we agree, mostly. But also I feel like I'm repeating myself. Again, the 25-10% don't have to "crush" it. Typically, a 15% kid is only one grade away from a 5% kid (one grade in a class equals=.2 GPA). So for these two kids to tie after second semeter, the 15% kid just needs one grade higher than his last semester in a single class and the 5% one grade lower in a single class. Think 3.6 to 3.8 and 3.8 to 3.6. This happens, and often to a greater extent. You are over-estimating the average student's consistency.

Your other point, that people reduce their effort second semeter, is true. However, some of this is that they just learn to study smarter (a lot of time is wasted first semester). I saw some of the more consistent performers improve second semester because they kept up a similar work ethic.

[A'nold]

I feel like we agree, mostly. But also I feel like I'm repeating myself. Again, the 25-10% don't have to "crush" it. Typically, a 15% kid is only one grade away from a 5% kid (one grade in a class equals=.2 GPA). So for these two kids to tie after second semeter, the 15% kid just needs one grade higher than his last semester in a single class and the 5% one grade lower in a single class. Think 3.6 to 3.8 and 3.8 to 3.6. This happens, and often to a greater extent. You are over-estimating the average student's consistency.

Your other point, that people reduce their effort second semeter, is true. However, some of this is that they just learn to study smarter (a lot of time is wasted first semester). I saw some of the more consistent performers improve second semester because they kept up a similar work ethic.

To the bolded: I don't really that that is true. For one thing, at least at my school, there is a very large divide between those w/ top grades and those at median. Think 3.5+ compared to the median at 2.7. People that "got it" are unlikely to dip very much b/c they get grades that consistently place them FAR above the curve. If you are talking about a school w/ grade inflation with a median of like a 3.3, then I can see why there may not be as much wiggle room at the top and that 1 grade can make a huge difference. Maybe this is where we are disagreeing.

[krogers]

...

[newyorker69]

why do i see people referring to "T13" recently... i thought T-14 was the "elite" grouping of schools. Is "T13" an attempt to belittle G-U-L-C?

[newyorker69]

WTH... i typed T-fourteen and it automatically changed my post to T13. What is gong on here?

[A'nold]

WTH... i typed T-fourteen and it automatically changed my post to T13. What is gong on here?

Check the April Foolz thread.

[prncaspian3]

This would be a cruel, cruel joke directed at this thread in particular. And now, I attempt to verify...

[prncaspian3]

T14

[prncaspian3]

Cruel!

[A'nold]

This would be a cruel, cruel joke directed at this thread in particular. And now, I attempt to verify: T-14

Cheater. No hyphens allowed.

[prncaspian3]

Yup, corrected....

It looks like we might have the last laugh, however...Once Georgetown actually does move into the T13, according to this year's soon-to-be-released US News and World Report.