Top Law Schools

I'm planning on applying from my TTT to a couple of T20 and T30 schools. I know, I know, I can't assume anything, blah blah blah. I'm not. Maybe it won't work, although given both my assessments of my classmates and my 168 at a median 152 school, I think it makes sense to plan ahead.

So, that said, what's different at your new school? I'm not talking about OCI or other opportunities, I mean the day to day stuff. Is the level of instruction different? Are your classmates noticeable different?

Sorry, morbid curiosity here, but why did you attend a TTT with a 168?

Very unconventional undergrad experience. Long story short, I was an extreme reverse splitter, 168, 2.3. Being a couple years out of school with work experience in criminal law apparently wasn't enough to overcome the UGPA this year with floods of applicants fleeing the economy.

thrillerjesus wrote:Very unconventional undergrad experience. Long story short, I was an extreme reverse splitter, 168, 2.3. Being a couple years out of school with work experience in criminal law apparently wasn't enough to overcome the UGPA this year with floods of applicants fleeing the economy.

FWIW, high LSAT, low GPA is a regular splitter. Reverse splitter is high GPA, low LSAT.

To answer your question, it depends a lot of what TTT you go to and where you're trying to transfer. Not all TTTs are created equal. It makes a difference if you have a compelling reason for trying to break into a different market than you're in, or if you're moving from a lower ranked school to a higher ranked school in the same market. Plus transferring seems to be a crapshoot, so all you can really do is work hard and smart, get the best grades possible, put together a great transfer package and wait and see. Trying to guess now is going to be just that, guessing.

Thanks, I always get the whole splitter thing confused.

Just to be clear: I am NOT asking about my chances. I know the drill. I'm just curious what differences people who have made this particular jump have noticed.

thrillerjesus wrote:I'm planning on applying from my TTT to a couple of T20 and T30 schools. I know, I know, I can't assume anything, blah blah blah. I'm not. Maybe it won't work, although given both my assessments of my classmates and my 168 at a median 152 school, I think it makes sense to plan ahead.

So, that said, what's different at your new school? I'm not talking about OCI or other opportunities, I mean the day to day stuff. Is the level of instruction different? Are your classmates noticeable different?

Went from t3-->t10. Profs are way better. There are still some not so great profs, but they are usually people who were at the top of their game, but just got older and wore down a bit mentally. Classmates are definitely noticeably different. I took a couple 1L courses my first transfer year (because I didn't they weren't required at my old school), and it was seriously the difference between night and day with those students in comparison to the 1L at my old school. Upper level classes are a bit different, though, because people really get a lot lazier after their first year (e.g. not doing the reading a lot of times, focusing on other things besides class, etc), and I'm no exception to that. There's a pretty heavy distinction between the intensity level of a 1L course and upper level courses, including the curved upper level courses.

EDIT- I would imagine there wouldn't be that much of difference in the quality of students at a t10 vs a t20-30. After all you are talking about a few points on the LSAT that made the difference between the 2 categories of schools. t20-30 schools, however, typically don't seem to have as many rockstar profs (e.g. you won't have posner and easterbrook from the 7th circuit teaching your classes at UIUC).

Easterbrook seems like a dbag.

Aqualibrium wrote:Easterbrook seems like a dbag.

i'd still lick his shoes clean every day for a clerkship.

If you want to get the ball rolling now the best thing you can do is start going to office hours and buttering up your profs for when it comes to asking for recs. This will have the double benefit of giving you 1 on 1 time with the prof where you can dig for exam related tips. Go do a practice test (or bring in a midterm if you have one) and go over the answer with your prof.

XxSpyKEx wrote:

thrillerjesus wrote:I'm planning on applying from my TTT to a couple of T20 and T30 schools. I know, I know, I can't assume anything, blah blah blah. I'm not. Maybe it won't work, although given both my assessments of my classmates and my 168 at a median 152 school, I think it makes sense to plan ahead.

So, that said, what's different at your new school? I'm not talking about OCI or other opportunities, I mean the day to day stuff. Is the level of instruction different? Are your classmates noticeable different?

Went from t3-->t10. Profs are way better. There are still some not so great profs, but they are usually people who were at the top of their game, but just got older and wore down a bit mentally. Classmates are definitely noticeably different. I took a couple 1L courses my first transfer year (because I didn't they weren't required at my old school), and it was seriously the difference between night and day with those students in comparison to the 1L at my old school. Upper level classes are a bit different, though, because people really get a lot lazier after their first year (e.g. not doing the reading a lot of times, focusing on other things besides class, etc), and I'm no exception to that. There's a pretty heavy distinction between the intensity level of a 1L course and upper level courses, including the curved upper level courses.

EDIT- I would imagine there wouldn't be that much of difference in the quality of students at a t10 vs a t20-30. After all you are talking about a few points on the LSAT that made the difference between the 2 categories of schools. t20-30 schools, however, typically don't seem to have as many rockstar profs (e.g. you won't have posner and easterbrook from the 7th circuit teaching your classes at UIUC).

Was it your impression that the 1L classes you took at the new school covered a lot more ground than at your old school?

thrillerjesus wrote:

XxSpyKEx wrote:

thrillerjesus wrote:I'm planning on applying from my TTT to a couple of T20 and T30 schools. I know, I know, I can't assume anything, blah blah blah. I'm not. Maybe it won't work, although given both my assessments of my classmates and my 168 at a median 152 school, I think it makes sense to plan ahead.

So, that said, what's different at your new school? I'm not talking about OCI or other opportunities, I mean the day to day stuff. Is the level of instruction different? Are your classmates noticeable different?

Went from t3-->t10. Profs are way better. There are still some not so great profs, but they are usually people who were at the top of their game, but just got older and wore down a bit mentally. Classmates are definitely noticeably different. I took a couple 1L courses my first transfer year (because I didn't they weren't required at my old school), and it was seriously the difference between night and day with those students in comparison to the 1L at my old school. Upper level classes are a bit different, though, because people really get a lot lazier after their first year (e.g. not doing the reading a lot of times, focusing on other things besides class, etc), and I'm no exception to that. There's a pretty heavy distinction between the intensity level of a 1L course and upper level courses, including the curved upper level courses.

EDIT- I would imagine there wouldn't be that much of difference in the quality of students at a t10 vs a t20-30. After all you are talking about a few points on the LSAT that made the difference between the 2 categories of schools. t20-30 schools, however, typically don't seem to have as many rockstar profs (e.g. you won't have posner and easterbrook from the 7th circuit teaching your classes at UIUC).

Was it your impression that the 1L classes you took at the new school covered a lot more ground than at your old school?

Probably less ground, if anything. You really don't learn jackshit substantively at top schools. I think the reasoning is because at lower ranked schools there is more of a focus on doing things that will help ensure their students pass the bar, whereas, passing the bar is expected at top schools... I recall talking with one of the associates at my firm last summer about something crim law related. The following was our conversation:

Associate: [he talks about something (I don't remember what), let's call it "X"]
Me: What's X?
Associate: [Stares at me blankly for a few seconds] Are you fucking kidding me?
Me: No, I really don't know what X is.
Associate: Where did you take crim law at?
Me: XYZ top law school
Associate: Oh, okay, that explains it. I don't understand how they didn't teach you about X. It's about as basic of a concept in crim law as mens rea and actus reus.

My classmates are different. The TTTTs collect two separate pools of students. One pool is fresh out of undergrad and bombed at either GPA, LSAT, or both. The second pool consists of older individuals looking for a career change. I always enjoyed talking to and listening to this latter group in class. At my new school the student population is much, much younger. I find the lack of life experience in the student body to be a negative. The sheer intelligence and potential of the "fresh out of undergrad" group is, however, vastly superior at my new school.

The faculty is different in that they are more comfortable, sort of at the top of their profession. At my original school, I observed a sense of desperation, as in the faculty was fervently wishing to teach higher up the food chain.

Day to day operations I don't really see that much of a difference, but I would say the overall atmosphere is more relaxed. Even though the economy is bad, there isn't so much of a feeling of impending doom about graduating. At my TTTT, the students were very much aware of where they were ..... and the looming uncertainty of what graduation would .... bring.