. Forum

[MisterBragi]

.

[Tsispilos]

did you not apply to Berkeley?

[MisterBragi]

.

[MisterBragi]

.

[Machine Spirit]

I said no. I personally chose CLS and the possibility of a 2ndary Journal over staying at a T20 with those same stats and LR. However, I don't think if I had been in the T14 I would have made that same choice. There doesn't seem to be that great a difference in national recognition at that level, and even then, you're only assuming that you'll get on the 2ndary (though the odds are in your favor). The sacrifice just doesn't seem worth it.

[TheBigMediocre]

.

[Eric475]

Agree with most of the posters so far. I know ITE is bad, but I feel like top 10% and LR at a top-14 has to be damn good, and transferring to Columbia would be a bigger risk.

[como]

I can't think of any options that would not be available to you at Cornell (if that's where you happen to be) if you're top 10% and LR. I guess Wachtell would be a stretch, but we've even got three Cravaths out of the last batch. The top 10% is well repped in V10 firms and I would wager that you would be competitive with applicants at any of the government jobs you desire. I'm pretty sure you would be in the same boat at NU or GULC (if you are at one of those schools).

Don't think you have anything to lose by staying put, while you could potentially lose some GPA (which wouldn't be good for academia) by going to CLS.

[arstech]

we've even got three Cravaths out of the last batch

No we didn't. They were all from the class of 2010. I don't know of anyone in the last batch (which I read to mean class of 2011) who got Cravath offers.

[como]

we've even got three Cravaths out of the last batch

No we didn't. They were all from the class of 2010. I don't know of anyone in the last batch (which I read to mean class of 2011) who got Cravath offers.

Sorry about the misinformation. I haven't looked at the list in awhile. Still, I think my conclusion stands strong. I still believe that you should stay where you are, barring personal reasons for going to Columbia (family/friends/hate your current city/school).

[LeahNic]

we've even got three Cravaths out of the last batch

No we didn't. They were all from the class of 2010. I don't know of anyone in the last batch (which I read to mean class of 2011) who got Cravath offers.

Sorry about the misinformation. I haven't looked at the list in awhile. Still, I think my conclusion stands strong. I still believe that you should stay where you are, barring personal reasons for going to Columbia (family/friends/hate your current city/school).

I know of at least one 2011 Cravath offer that was turned down.

And, in response to OP, I think you should stay where you are in the top 10% and on LR. I think it is a much bigger risk to leave.

[MisterBragi]

.

[como]

Thanks to everyone who has voted or commented, or both. I am definitely hearing what you're saying, but I don't understand the risk that people keep bringing up regarding transferring to Columbia. I didn't think my fall recruiting prospects would be hurt that much, if at all, by the transfer. Employers will see my 1L grades, and that I transferred to a better school, right? Also, I'll likely have access to more West Coast firms and offices, and more interviews in general. And, although it's not a done deal, I have heard most transfers at Columbia get on journals, usually their first or second choices, so at least I'd have something to put on that line of the resume (although that info is anecdotal, of course).

So, what is the risk? Is the risk more in regards to long-term clerkship and prestigious government job issues? (Like, if I show up at Columbia in the Fall and can't come close to replicating my 1L performance, which I acknowledge is a very real possibility in a more competitive pool?)
Anyway, anyone who commented on the risk factor - would love to hear you expound. My thoughts going into this were that it was essentially a wash in regards to professional prospects, which is why I wanted to get some advice. It's good to get these perspectives, so thanks again.

Precisely. Also, you have the big-fish/small-fish consideration. If you're at GULC, it's irrelevant, but I'm pretty sure Cornell and NU are significantly smaller than CLS. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[let/them/eat/cake]

Thanks to everyone who has voted or commented, or both. I am definitely hearing what you're saying, but I don't understand the risk that people keep bringing up regarding transferring to Columbia. I didn't think my fall recruiting prospects would be hurt that much, if at all, by the transfer. Employers will see my 1L grades, and that I transferred to a better school, right? Also, I'll likely have access to more West Coast firms and offices, and more interviews in general. And, although it's not a done deal, I have heard most transfers at Columbia get on journals, usually their first or second choices, so at least I'd have something to put on that line of the resume (although that info is anecdotal, of course).

So, what is the risk? Is the risk more in regards to long-term clerkship and prestigious government job issues? (Like, if I show up at Columbia in the Fall and can't come close to replicating my 1L performance, which I acknowledge is a very real possibility in a more competitive pool?)

Anyway, anyone who commented on the risk factor - would love to hear you expound. My thoughts going into this were that it was essentially a wash in regards to professional prospects, which is why I wanted to get some advice. It's good to get these perspectives, so thanks again.

idk if it's an issue of risk, but at least of perception during interviews: why xfer? it seems prestige whorish without a good reason, and while i'm drawing arbitrary distinctions, i can only envision it being worthwhile for HYS--those schools it would seem feasible to answer the "why xfer out of [lower t14] with top 10% and LR for [HYS] school" question with "ummm HYS" and it just make intuitive sense). it just doesn't seem to make sense to do it for columbia w/o another reason.

i mean, either way, you'll do great if you stay put regardless, and it's not like you'd get shut out bc u xferred regardless--it's a great resume. so i guess no harm no foul, but that's my disjointed 2 cents (making a sandwich and researching the CRFB atm).

[MisterBragi]

.

[270910]

And, I hear it's more and more important to be able to market yourself to firms as having some kind of specialization (in my case, within litigation), as long as it's not something exceedingly rare to practice in like human rights or international law, and as long it's in one of the firm's established practice areas.

Broski. Firms hire you before your 2L year. They barely expect you to know what a law firm IS much less have a 'specialty'. They couldn't give two shits about your school's clinical offerings.

They'll care about law review, though - ESPECIALLY for any kind of litigation. And they'll definitely care about whether or not you get a prestigious federal clerkship, for which law review is a de facto requirement in many instances.

Classes offered by a school: Irrelevant

West coast placement: Irrelevant at your level of performance

Law review: For many career paths, extraordinarily relevant

You're not going to wind up dead in a street if you don't transfer. You'll still have terrific prospects, and you may legitimately enjoy Columbia more. Personal preference matters a lot. But unless you map out a course that very specifically doesn't require law review or clerkships and does require being in NYC, then transferring to Columbia would be detrimental to your career prospects.

[on_ne_sait_jamais]

Not to be a NU troll... Well okay to be an NU troll... NU is not in the same category as Cornell and Gtown when it comes to big law placement... It's not even close. NU>>>cornell/gtown,

[270910]

Not to be a NU troll... Well okay to be an NU troll... NU is not in the same category as Cornell and Gtown when it comes to big law placement... It's not even close. NU>>>cornell/gtown,

God fucking damn it. HE IS IN THE TOP 10% OF HIS CLASS AND ON MOTHER FUCKING LAW REVIEW. The differences in big law placement are largest prior to taking into account performance and smallest once you have already crushed the competition beneath your heel.

This is what drives me insane about this forum. Everyone gets SO GOOD at identifying schools that do better or worse at X, Y, and Z that they completely fail to realize that first year grades are an order of magnitude more important. And it goes without saying (ok, it doesn't go without saying it so I'm saying it now) that top of the class + T14 = solid. I wouldn't go quite so far as to say identical employment prospects, but it will be damn similar.

And to the extent there ARE differences between their placement even factoring in top 10% + LR, it isn't going to make a lick of difference for the transfer calculation.

[Machine Spirit]

Sounds like the guy may have already made up his mind, before asking the question.

Regardless, disco's responses sound spot on.

[como]

Not to be a NU troll... Well okay to be an NU troll... NU is not in the same category as Cornell and Gtown when it comes to big law placement... It's not even close. NU>>>cornell/gtown,

Mind backing that up? What percentage of 2011 is a SA right now?

[on_ne_sait_jamais]

Not to be a NU troll... Well okay to be an NU troll... NU is not in the same category as Cornell and Gtown when it comes to big law placement... It's not even close. NU>>>cornell/gtown,

Mind backing that up? What percentage of 2011 is a SA right now?

Are you serious? Look at any biglaw placement ranking over the past 5 years.

[doyleoil]

Not to be a NU troll... Well okay to be an NU troll... NU is not in the same category as Cornell and Gtown when it comes to big law placement... It's not even close. NU>>>cornell/gtown,

Mind backing that up? What percentage of 2011 is a SA right now?

Are you serious? Look at any biglaw placement ranking over the past 5 years.

are YOU serious? this summer is the first real test of a school's placement power ITE

welcome to the new reality:

http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdail ... iates.html

[on_ne_sait_jamais]

Not to be a NU troll... Well okay to be an NU troll... NU is not in the same category as Cornell and Gtown when it comes to big law placement... It's not even close. NU>>>cornell/gtown,

Mind backing that up? What percentage of 2011 is a SA right now?

Are you serious? Look at any biglaw placement ranking over the past 5 years.

are YOU serious? this summer is the first real test of a school's placement power ITE

welcome to the new reality:

http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdail ... iates.html

You're dense. The fact that firms have hired less students overall, does not mean that firms will hire less NU students in comparison to Cornell and Gtown students respectively. The absolute placement disparity which results in the status quo of NU>>>> Cornell/Gtown, is just that-The status quo.

[como]

You're dense. The fact that firms have hired less students overall, does not mean that firms will hire less NU students in comparison to Cornell and Gtown students respectively. The absolute placement disparity which results in the status quo of NU>>>> Cornell/Gtown, is just that-The status quo.

Until you offer numbers, your assertions are worthless. We got 40-45%. What did you get?

Also, I'm not going to go through the trouble of linking the source, but you can easily find it on ATL. I'm not bragging, I just want you to substantiate your claim with some evidence. I wouldn't doubt that NU places slightly more students in biglaw, but I think four "greater than" signs is overstating the case.

[on_ne_sait_jamais]

You're dense. The fact that firms have hired less students overall, does not mean that firms will hire less NU students in comparison to Cornell and Gtown students respectively. The absolute placement disparity which results in the status quo of NU>>>> Cornell/Gtown, is just that-The status quo.

Until you offer numbers, your assertions are worthless. We got 40-45%. What did you get?

Also, I'm not going to go through the trouble of linking the source, but you can easily find it on ATL. I'm not bragging, I just want you to substantiate your claim with some evidence. I wouldn't doubt that NU places slightly more students in biglaw, but I think four "greater than" signs is overstating the case.

You're ridiculous. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you agree that NU places better than Cornell/Gtown. The stats from pre- 09' you're not disputing, but you are disputing that post 09' NU maintained it's signficant advantage over Cornell/Gtown. And that advantage has now decreased so as not to warrant three greater than symbols. Furthermore, until I provide stats, everything that I say is unwarranted.


Do I have that all straight? B/c you're ridiculous. The burden is on the OP to provide stats indicating that with regards to Biglaw placement, NU=Cornell=Gtown... Anyone who has done an iota of research, knows that this is just not the case. If you need to sleep easier at night, b/c your school doesn't place as well as NU, so be it.