Top Law Schools

Here it is: NU ---> H.

INFO:
GPA- ~3.91 (percentile? better than 10%, probably not 5%, maybe 7?)
No Law Review at NU ("best" secondary journal). Didn't do the write on at HLS.
Have TA position lined up.
Intentions- Start in BigLaw, see what happens. Could do govt. Could do Academia. Could become a ski bum.
Money- Have 30k at NU. Old enough to likely get cash from HLS- we'll see what they say.


Reasons to stay:
1. No gain in BigLaw chances. If anything worse.
2. Have TA position with great professor.
3. Don't have to move.
4. Come on. How likely is Academia anyway. Especially once the NYT finally forces half the schools to close down and there are no more academia jobs.

Reasons to go:
1. I got into Harvard.
2. While Biglaw may work, I think I'll have more choices if it makes me suicidal. At least I'll be able to know I have choices.
3. I don't know where the legal profession is going, but I think I certainly won't lose out by switching. And probably gain. Maybe it makes no difference after 5 years of practice. But maybe there is some difference.
4. What's there to lose? I'll probably get the Biglaw job, and if I don't it'll be because I majorly mess up interviews, so would have happened either way.
5. I don't buy this relationships with professor thing. If I have good relationships now after a year, I'll be fine after next year. And if not, I can do a clerkship after a year of working, and have the same 2 years of relationship when applying.


This is about minimizing chances of regret. If I'm 7 years in and hating it, I might regret not taking Harvard. But if the same happens and I'm still just as stuck, I still don't imagine I'll think I would have been better off staying at NU.
In other words, "why not."


So I reckon I'll go no matter what you all say. This is just for fun. (And if people agree with me I'll feel better and if they don't I'll get all doubty. But don't think I'll withdraw and make space for you- I'd certainly not decide until it was too late for that.)
And we'll make this a poll just for fun.

Good title, but I would stay.

3.91 is probably within top 5%. 3.97 is top 3% at graduation, and even people with high GPAs go up substantially after 1L. Since you didn't get LR, your shot at court of appeals clerkship is greatly diminished, so one of the key reasons to stay (clerkship chances) seems to be greatly reduced.

That being said, the $30k at NU is that total or per year? If per year, you'd be an idiot to not stay. The extra $60k of debt will mean $800/mo or so more in loan payments. Even in big law, that makes a big difference.

Unless you are gunning for Chicago big law, I doubt transfering will hurt your OCI.

I'll be honest and admit that if I were you, I'd go. NU is obviously an excellent school with a stellar reputation, and you might be hurting yourself in the short term for the reasons you listed, but if it were me, I would always regret turning down Harvard Law School.

*comment about NU's absurd grade inflation/whatevever*

Transferthrowaway wrote:*comment about NU's absurd grade inflation/whatevever*

It doesn't really get going til 2/3L. Then median is like an A-.

Transferthrowaway wrote:*comment about NU's absurd grade inflation/whatevever*

I'm really surprised about how soft NU's curve must be at the top to have that many 3.9+. Georgetown's is much, much tighter.

Does NU give a 4.33 for A+ and give them out fairly liberally, or just give out a lot of As?

scribelaw wrote:

Transferthrowaway wrote:*comment about NU's absurd grade inflation/whatevever*

I'm really surprised about how soft NU's curve must be at the top to have that many 3.9+. Georgetown's is much, much tighter.

3-5% must get an A+ in each class.

Desert Fox wrote:

scribelaw wrote:

Transferthrowaway wrote:*comment about NU's absurd grade inflation/whatevever*

I'm really surprised about how soft NU's curve must be at the top to have that many 3.9+. Georgetown's is much, much tighter.

3-5% must get an A+ in each class.

Oh, interesting. Most of my classes at GULC didn't give out any A+ and the max was one. And even if you got one, it counted the same as an A for GPA purposes. That must account for the difference.

Desert Fox wrote:

scribelaw wrote:

Transferthrowaway wrote:*comment about NU's absurd grade inflation/whatevever*

I'm really surprised about how soft NU's curve must be at the top to have that many 3.9+. Georgetown's is much, much tighter.

3-5% must get an A+ in each class.

Are you kidding or is that the truth?

Go wherever you get more money. But seriously, there won't be benefits to transfering that are worth starting over. Let go of the 1L prestige mentality; you've won. You have all the brass rings, skads of people at hys would beg to trade places with you. H was better than NU 9 months ago when you had no grades, but it's not true anymore.

Transferthrowaway wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:

scribelaw wrote:
I'm really surprised about how soft NU's curve must be at the top to have that many 3.9+. Georgetown's is much, much tighter.

3-5% must get an A+ in each class.

Are you kidding or is that the truth?

Actually I was wrong. It's 3-7%. http://www.law.northwestern.edu/academi ... olicy.html

Desert Fox wrote:

Transferthrowaway wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:

scribelaw wrote:
I'm really surprised about how soft NU's curve must be at the top to have that many 3.9+. Georgetown's is much, much tighter.

3-5% must get an A+ in each class.

Are you kidding or is that the truth?

Actually I was wrong. It's 3-7%. http://www.law.northwestern.edu/academi ... olicy.html

I have a hard time believing this is a good grading policy. It just devalues the high GPA, and firms/clerkships are going to look primarily at where you are in the class anyway.

scribelaw wrote:
I have a hard time believing this is a good grading policy. It just devalues the high GPA, and firms/clerkships are going to look primarily at where you are in the class anyway.

I think at worst they figure out how bullshit it is, and figure out how you actually did. So I doubt the big chicago firms, and the top NYC firms are tricked.

But I bet some firms get fooled. If you see a 3.6, it looks good even if it's possibly worse than top third.

Desert Fox wrote:

scribelaw wrote:
I have a hard time believing this is a good grading policy. It just devalues the high GPA, and firms/clerkships are going to look primarily at where you are in the class anyway.

I think at worst they figure out how bullshit it is, and figure out how you actually did. So I doubt the big chicago firms, and the top NYC firms are tricked.

But I bet some firms get fooled. If you see a 3.6, it looks good even if it's possibly worse than top third.

This is a good point. I bet you're right, especially for firms in secondary markets that don't have OCI interviewing programs with the top schools.

NU: Everybody gets A+s; UChicago: Nobody gets A+s (186s)

RIGOROUS

Desert Fox wrote: But I bet some firms get fooled. If you see a 3.6, it looks good even if it's possibly worse than top third.

It sucks that my 3.5 (top 10% at my school, with a 3.0 curve) probably gets stuffed at the bottom of the pile below the 3.6 who's ranked 200th in his class... but I guess that's what I get for not studying harder for the LSAT!

Heartford wrote:

Desert Fox wrote: But I bet some firms get fooled. If you see a 3.6, it looks good even if it's possibly worse than top third.

It sucks that my 3.5 (top 10% at my school, with a 3.0 curve) probably gets stuffed at the bottom of the pile below the 3.6 who's ranked 200th in his class... but I guess that's what I get for not studying harder for the LSAT!

Yes, that is EXACTLY what NU's curve does and what you deserve.

Holly Golightly wrote:

Heartford wrote:

Desert Fox wrote: But I bet some firms get fooled. If you see a 3.6, it looks good even if it's possibly worse than top third.

It sucks that my 3.5 (top 10% at my school, with a 3.0 curve) probably gets stuffed at the bottom of the pile below the 3.6 who's ranked 200th in his class... but I guess that's what I get for not studying harder for the LSAT!

Yes, that is EXACTLY what NU's curve does and what you deserve.

?

scribelaw wrote:

Transferthrowaway wrote:*comment about NU's absurd grade inflation/whatevever*

I'm really surprised about how soft NU's curve must be at the top to have that many 3.9+. Georgetown's is much, much tighter.

Does NU give a 4.33 for A+ and give them out fairly liberally, or just give out a lot of As?

OP's estimate is a bit high. 3.97 is top 3% at graduation. 3.9 is probably top 5% or better after 1L.

Do people not grade-on at NU? Seems crazy that a 3.9+ isn't enough to grade on. Anyway, if all you want is biglaw then you should probably stay at NU. If you want other things like clerkships, I'd transfer to Harvard, cause I mean no LR seems like pretty much a killer for really good clerkships. Idk if I was an interviewer and saw a dude with a 3.9+ from NU interviewing at Harvard's EIP I'd be like wtf dude, why did you transfer. So make sure you have a good answer.

elmagic wrote:Do people not grade-on at NU? Seems crazy that a 3.9+ isn't enough to grade on. Anyway, if all you want is biglaw then you should probably stay at NU. If you want other things like clerkships, I'd transfer to Harvard, cause I mean no LR seems like pretty much a killer for really good clerkships. Idk if I was an interviewer and saw a dude with a 3.9+ from NU interviewing at Harvard's EIP I'd be like wtf dude, why did you transfer. So make sure you have a good answer.

No grade ons.
36 seats. 10 are pure writing. 26 are half writing and half grades. The 26 get filled first.

Depends on what market you're goin for. I get the sense that especially at top NYC firms, Harvard does quite a bit better than NU.