Top Law Schools

.

Yeah, going from 25-30 to upper teens really is more of a lateral transfer than anything else. I'd imagine you would be pretty competitive for a transfer if you can hit that top 20% mark. For a top 10 school like NYU, my guess is higher than top 20%

I am curious what people have to say about this...

I have done a little research on yahoo transfer apps but there is hardly any info on this kind of transfer in this range. Looking at the yahoo group, it seems like top 20-25% can be enough to go from 30-40's --->20-14 range. Also it seems like 10-15% at a school ranked 20-30 will get you into a top 10 school. I would guess top 30% (maybe even 40%) is enough to make a ~5 point jump in the 30-17 range. USC/VANDY might require better grades than stated. To answer your specific question- you probably need to be in the top 30% of your class at least.

Its too bad there isn't more data on this, but this jumble of numbers is this best I do!

Also a side thought: I doubt the school your applying to is influenced more by your current school's rank than by the schools reputation, or their perception of that school. For example (IMO), Vandy is more likely to take a student in the top 30% of their class from Fordham, than one with the same grades from Iowa.

ENGINEERD wrote:I am curious what people have to say about this...

I have done a little research on yahoo transfer apps but there is hardly any info on this kind of transfer in this range. Looking at the yahoo group, it seems like top 20-25% can be enough to go from 30-40's --->20-14 range. Also it seems like 10-15% at a school ranked 20-30 will get you into a top 10 school. I would guess top 30% (maybe even 40%) is enough to make a ~5 point jump in the 30-17 range. USC/VANDY might require better grades than stated. To answer your specific question- you probably need to be in the top 30% of your class at least.

Its too bad there isn't more data on this, but this jumble of numbers is this best I do!

Also a side thought: I doubt the school your applying to is influenced more by your current school's rank than by the schools reputation, or their perception of that school. For example (IMO), Vandy is more likely to take a student in the top 30% of their class from Fordham, than one with the same grades from Iowa.

I don't think the last sentence is correct. It wasn't my experience. Seems logical in TLS land (favoring the school with the higher biglaw percentages), but this isn't really the way schools think.

The assumption of posts like this seems to be that you can precisely calibrate the grades you will get. More power to you if you can, but if so I doubt you'd need help from these forums. My advice is to aim for the #1 spot.

Agree with above poster. Worry about transferring when and if that time comes. It is like people asking what LSAT they need for Illinois and then only aiming for 166, as if they will hit 166 on their practice exams and stop studying. You don't even have that luxury in law school of knowing "where you are." Who knows what top 20% studying looks like versus top 50%, or 5%. It's not like you can aim for a percentile and then actually do things in furtherance of that goal alone. Just do the right things and see what happens.

If I just barely got into a T30, I'd probably be satisfied. Also I think the things that made your 0L cycle unpredictable will also make your transfer cycle unpredictable.

.

USC: top 15-20%
UCLA/Gtown: top 10%
T10: top 5%

PunjabiLower wrote:haha yeah...honestly I am so lucky I got into a T30...given the amount of work I put in undergrad and on the LSAT.

I'm having a bit of trouble in law school though...I just don't know a good process of learning. I currently don't pay much attention in class...and I haven't briefed a single case yet. I go to 90%+ of the classes(I don't pay attention...but I use the professor's powerpoint slides in my notes), I do all the casebook reading, get canned briefs for cases I don't understand, and use good 2L and 3L outlines(from the same professor) for studying. I am also relying on the EnE's and Dressler...and write anything I learn from the supps on the side of the 2L/3L outlines. However, my main focus is using the 2L and 3L outlines for understanding the classes. They go really well with the class because each outline is from the same professor I have. Thoughts? Should I brief cases or is it too late for that? The outlines I am using have the facts of each case and the legal rule/holding embedded into the relevant section of the outline...is this enough?

Also, I have been reading GTM and LSC throughout the semester and plan to read GTM twice before the semester is over.

Whoa. You want to crack the "T17", and then follow that up with admissions that: 1) You miss ~10% of your classes, 2) Don't pay attention in class, and 3) You don't have your method down.

#3 is somewhat excusable as finding a rhythm can take some time. HOWEVER, you need to be going to every class and paying attention. The key to success is *listening* to the way your professor describes something, and being able to not only understand that material on the final, but regurgitate it back to your professor using the exact same lingo/verbiage that he/she explained the concept with. The difference between an A and a B exam response is being able to QUICKLY connect with your professor through your writing, and the only way to do this (when he/she is reading 100 other responses) is by explaining a concept in the exact same way it was explained in class. Supplement books and briefs use their own verbiage - so you need to keep in mind that they are merely aids for concepts, but should never be used for terminology or ways of explaining a legal concept on your final. There are a lot of smart people in your class, just as smart as you (or more), and they're paying attention.

I'm going to be very frank with you; it sounds like you're slacking off where it counts (class) - and you're hoping to make it up by reading supplements twice over. That is a poor plan of attack and I don't think you're going to get anyone here to encourage such. You need to go to class and turn the internet off on your laptop, and if you're not disciplined enough for that, stop taking your laptop and try a notepad. I know several people that ended up doing this.


Hierarchy of Learning Materials
What your professor says
.
What the case and case notes say
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Supplements

Badger3920 wrote:

PunjabiLower wrote:haha yeah...honestly I am so lucky I got into a T30...given the amount of work I put in undergrad and on the LSAT.

I'm having a bit of trouble in law school though...I just don't know a good process of learning. I currently don't pay much attention in class...and I haven't briefed a single case yet. I go to 90%+ of the classes(I don't pay attention...but I use the professor's powerpoint slides in my notes), I do all the casebook reading, get canned briefs for cases I don't understand, and use good 2L and 3L outlines(from the same professor) for studying. I am also relying on the EnE's and Dressler...and write anything I learn from the supps on the side of the 2L/3L outlines. However, my main focus is using the 2L and 3L outlines for understanding the classes. They go really well with the class because each outline is from the same professor I have. Thoughts? Should I brief cases or is it too late for that? The outlines I am using have the facts of each case and the legal rule/holding embedded into the relevant section of the outline...is this enough?

Also, I have been reading GTM and LSC throughout the semester and plan to read GTM twice before the semester is over.

Whoa. You want to crack the "T17", and then follow that up with admissions that: 1) You miss ~10% of your classes, 2) Don't pay attention in class, and 3) You don't have your method down.

#3 is somewhat excusable as finding a rhythm can take some time. HOWEVER, you need to be going to every class and paying attention. The key to success is *listening* to the way your professor describes something, and being able to not only understand that material on the final, but regurgitate it back to your professor using the exact same lingo/verbiage that he/she explained the concept with. The difference between an A and a B exam response is being able to QUICKLY connect with your professor through your writing, and the only way to do this (when he/she is reading 100 other responses) is by explaining a concept in the exact same way it was explained in class. Supplement books and briefs use their own verbiage - so you need to keep in mind that they are merely aids for concepts, but should never be used for terminology or ways of explaining a legal concept on your final. There are a lot of smart people in your class, just as smart as you (or more), and they're paying attention.

I'm going to be very frank with you; it sounds like you're slacking off where it counts (class) - and you're hoping to make it up by reading supplements twice over. That is a poor plan of attack and I don't think you're going to get anyone here to encourage such. You need to go to class and turn the internet off on your laptop, and if you're not disciplined enough for that, stop taking your laptop and try a notepad. I know several people that ended up doing this.


Hierarchy of Learning Materials
What your professor says
.
What the case and case notes say
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Supplements

yeah...it's just that everything the professor says...is right in the old outlines..word for word...it's like they are robots and they use the same teaching style/structure year after year after year...

Outlining isn't about knowledge acquisition it's about skill acquisition.