UChi Students & Alumni Taking Questions Forum

[WheninLaw]

Penalver: 1:1
Henderson: 3:2
Levmore 3:1
Fennell: 5:1
Strahilevitz: 50:1

I'd take the line on Henderson. That seems a little soft. But other than that I think i'm in agreement.

Henderson had Torts graded really fast last year. Doubt it is him.

[Mal Reynolds]

I think this is a conspiracy to narrow down the culprit to Lior. I won't stand for that.

[beepboopbeep]

Penalver: 1:1
Henderson: 3:2
Levmore 3:1
Fennell: 5:1
Strahilevitz: 50:1

I'd take the line on Henderson. That seems a little soft. But other than that I think i'm in agreement.

Henderson had Torts graded really fast last year. Doubt it is him.

He also didn't ask five somewhat-silly completely-open-ended questions as the entirety of the exam last year.

[20141023]

.

[2014]

Can you make a convincing case to choose Chicago (almost sticker) over full tuition scholarship at Northwestern/Georgetown?

Over Georgetown? 100% yes, that school is a shit show and Chicago for most people's goals makes more sense even at sticker vs 150k.

I would take NU w/ 150k over Chicago w/ 15 or 30k or w/e, but I'm happy to make the argument for us if you want lol.

[Crowing]

I think this is a conspiracy to narrow down the culprit to Lior. I won't stand for that.

Will you hate me if I tell you my initial gut reaction was him?

[elterrible78]

Can you make a convincing case to choose Chicago (almost sticker) over full tuition scholarship at Northwestern/Georgetown?

Assuming money is an issue, I wouldn't do. Well, I definitely might take it over Georgetown, but definitely not NU. I'm one of the biggest cheerleaders for this school that you'll find, but paying (close to) sticker at Chicago when a full scholarship to NU is on the table is an unreasonably costly bit of insurance.

[Ricky-Bobby]

Awesome, thanks. I'd appreciate some pictures if you have time, but don't inconvenience yourself too much with it.

+1

http://imgur.com/a/vpNiO

Sorry about the mess :/

Thank you! That's actually a lot nicer than I thought it was going to be (because of price). I still fail to see the downside of that place.

Also the hookah is a nice touch.

[AspiringAcademic]

Anyone know how long it tends to take to get seminar paper grades back?

[orbotop]

i can't agree with the near unanimous opinion to chose NU w 150k over Chicago. if your goals include clerking (especially federal) and/or academia, i don't think you can default to NU. id go so far as to say you can't even reasonably choose NU. if you are interested in big law and happy to live in chicago, then NU is tcr. i presume the consensus is because most people identify with the latter (or think most 0Ls identify with the latter).

Can you make a convincing case to choose Chicago (almost sticker) over full tuition scholarship at Northwestern/Georgetown?

[Mal Reynolds]

i can't agree with the near unanimous opinion to chose NU w 150k over Chicago. if your goals include clerking (especially federal) and/or academia, i don't think you can default to NU. id go so far as to say you can't even reasonably choose NU. if you are interested in big law and happy to live in chicago, then NU is tcr. i presume the consensus is because most people identify with the latter (or think most 0Ls identify with the latter).

Can you make a convincing case to choose Chicago (almost sticker) over full tuition scholarship at Northwestern/Georgetown?

There is only a 3% difference in out clerking scores (10% v. 7%) that's not a smart reason to choose one or the other. And lol at academia.

[20141023]

.

[orbotop]

Here's the data, you decide.

NU, Last 3 Years Combined:

Federal Circuit = 45
Federal District = 59

Chicago, Last 3 Years Combined

Federal Circuit = 78
Federal District = 46

Consider that NU has had much larger classes than Chicago over the last three years. The gap is shrinking as NU cuts back, but even ignoring difference in class size, I think there is an indisputable takeaway: Chicago students have a MUCH better chance of snagging a federal circuit clerkship (and of course, also a federal district clerkship, as every one of the 78 could have gone to a district court).

Now, if OP doesn't care about clerking, then this is moot. But considering how many students who get into Chicago do care about clerking, it's probably relevant, and if OP wants advice, I don't think NU is obviously the right answer. In fact, I think OP should default to Chicago even at $$$ difference unless he/she is satisfied NU won't close any doors. But the point remains: it's a tough choice.

i can't agree with the near unanimous opinion to chose NU w 150k over Chicago. if your goals include clerking (especially federal) and/or academia, i don't think you can default to NU. id go so far as to say you can't even reasonably choose NU. if you are interested in big law and happy to live in chicago, then NU is tcr. i presume the consensus is because most people identify with the latter (or think most 0Ls identify with the latter).

Can you make a convincing case to choose Chicago (almost sticker) over full tuition scholarship at Northwestern/Georgetown?

There is only a 3% difference in out clerking scores (10% v. 7%) that's not a smart reason to choose one or the other. And lol at academia.

[Mal Reynolds]

A 20 person difference over three years is not worth sticker debt. Do you even math?

[elterrible78]

A 20 person difference over three years is not worth sticker debt. Do you even math?

Orbotop, it's not that tough a choice. $150k for a better CHANCE at a clerkship (at a school in which you acknowledge there are more people gunning for clerkships) is way too big a bet on a highly uncertain outcome. And though this may ruffle some feathers, you're graded on a curve with a higher overall quality student body. If you default to big law (because clerking is a sketchy prospect for any of us) it'd be madness to buy that clerking lottery ticket for that kind of dough.

[beepboopbeep]

There is only a 3% difference in our clerking scores (10% v. 7%) that's not a smart reason to choose one or the other. And lol at academia.

Mal, let's try not to be too big of a douche on these boards. I can easily see someone valuing a 1% chance at a 12-month clerkship at $50,000, and therefore a 3% difference could easily equal the $150,000 someone got from NU. If someone values each 1% increase even more ($200,000 per percent, for example), then UChicago becomes the obvious choice.

The problem is that it's plain dumb to value 3% of increased clerkship chance that much. You have no idea whether you'll even be in clerkship grade range before coming in, and while I'm sure given the numbers that a UofC student sitting roughly at, say, top 30% has a much better chance of a prestigious clerkship, there's no way it's worth taking on that much debt.

$150k is a real-ass amount of money. Think about buying five moderately-priced cars right now: that's how much debt it is.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 3&t=226592 is a pretty helpful thread.

[skers]

There is only a 3% difference in our clerking scores (10% v. 7%) that's not a smart reason to choose one or the other. And lol at academia.

Mal, let's try not to be too big of a douche on these boards. I can easily see someone valuing a 1% chance at a 12-month clerkship at $50,000, and therefore a 3% difference could easily equal the $150,000 someone got from NU. If someone values each 1% increase even more ($200,000 per percent, for example), then UChicago becomes the obvious choice.

The problem is that it's plain dumb to value 3% of increased clerkship chance that much. You have no idea whether you'll even be in clerkship grade range before coming in, and while I'm sure given the numbers that a UofC student sitting roughly at, say, top 30% has a much better chance of a prestigious clerkship, there's no way it's worth taking on that much debt.

$150k is a real-ass amount of money. Think about buying five moderately-priced cars right now: that's how much debt it is.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 3&t=226592 is a pretty helpful thread.

I'm still not sure. Anyone have some elaborate charts and graphs to help answer this one?

[20141023]

.

[beepboopbeep]

I'm still not sure. Anyone have some elaborate charts and graphs to help answer this one?

Good thinking, TemporarySaint – this is definitely the kind of questions that is best answered with a graphical representation. Someone who comes to the University of Chicago at sticker is basically foregoing the opportunity of being the proud owner of eleven Toyota Yarises. On the other hand, someone who attends NU on a full-ride scholarship will have foregone exactly zero Toyota Yarises. Alternatively, by attending NU for free, one would be approximately 5.8% closer to being able to purchase one Bugatti Veyron.

183

[elterrible78]

I'm still not sure. Anyone have some elaborate charts and graphs to help answer this one?

Good thinking, TemporarySaint – this is definitely the kind of questions that is best answered with a graphical representation. Someone who comes to the University of Chicago at sticker is basically foregoing the opportunity of being the proud owner of eleven Toyota Yarises. On the other hand, someone who attends NU on a full-ride scholarship will have foregone exactly zero Toyota Yarises. Alternatively, by attending NU for free, one would be approximately 5.8% closer to being able to purchase one Bugatti Veyron.

183

Fan-fucking-tastic, as my Elements prof might say.

[Crowing]

I'm still not sure. Anyone have some elaborate charts and graphs to help answer this one?

Good thinking, TemporarySaint – this is definitely the kind of questions that is best answered with a graphical representation. Someone who comes to the University of Chicago at sticker is basically foregoing the opportunity of being the proud owner of eleven Toyota Yarises. On the other hand, someone who attends NU on a full-ride scholarship will have foregone exactly zero Toyota Yarises. Alternatively, by attending NU for free, one would be approximately 5.8% closer to being able to purchase one Bugatti Veyron.

Lmao.

[orbotop]

happens every time. all tls discussions on looking at schools based on clerkships turn into debates about the merits of clerking or the grand delusions of the person interested. but that misses the entire point: conditional on wanting to clerk, you have to prioritize schools that do better at placing clerks. the gap between chicago and NU in this area is very significant. hell, the gap from chicago to, say, nyu is significant. you can lol at 20 people over 3 years, but that's a big difference, especially when you consider the underlying clerkships. so it doesn't matter whether you think the prospective student is crazy or ignorant for valuing an opportunity to clerk so highly. he or she wants to do it. who knows exactly why. who cares why. take it as a given and ask what makes sense. it's not obviously NU, but it might be. that's all im saying. people should quit suggesting that every person who chooses a law school should do so based on the outcome of the median student choosing the normal path out of graduation. that's not a bad reality check, but its a bad decision rule.

I'm still not sure. Anyone have some elaborate charts and graphs to help answer this one?

Good thinking, TemporarySaint – this is definitely the kind of questions that is best answered with a graphical representation. Someone who comes to the University of Chicago at sticker is basically foregoing the opportunity of being the proud owner of eleven Toyota Yarises. On the other hand, someone who attends NU on a full-ride scholarship will have foregone exactly zero Toyota Yarises. Alternatively, by attending NU for free, one would be approximately 5.8% closer to being able to purchase one Bugatti Veyron.



183

Fan-fucking-tastic, as my Elements prof might say.

[bk1]

@ that graph: what is this i dont even

so it doesn't matter whether you think the prospective student is crazy or ignorant for valuing an opportunity to clerk so highly. he or she wants to do it. who knows exactly why. who cares why. take it as a given and ask what makes sense.

I'm not going to weigh in on the decision since this isn't my school's thread and I'm not an objective party, but I take issue with this. Lots of applicants are ignorant about legal hiring. Even the more informed ones are often just parroting things they have learned from law students and lawyers without doing any critical thinking of their own. Take clerkships for example: a lot of 0Ls value clerkships very highly and seek them out in choosing a school, but only because someone told them they should value them very highly and should seek them out. These same 0Ls haven't thought through why a clerkship is valuable to them and how it fits into their career goals. They also haven't thought through the downsides of clerking ($50k+ in foregone income which is a significant chunk of change for people with $250k+ debt, often moving to some random part of the country for a year, etc). I'm not saying the poster here hasn't thought clerking through, but with this in mind I think it absolutely makes sense to ask "why?" and question 0Ls. Often times the answer behind the facade will merely be that the person is chasing a brass ring because law students and lawyers have told them that clerking is a brass ring.

[Emma.]

@ that graph: what is this i dont even

so it doesn't matter whether you think the prospective student is crazy or ignorant for valuing an opportunity to clerk so highly. he or she wants to do it. who knows exactly why. who cares why. take it as a given and ask what makes sense.

I'm not going to weigh in on the decision since this isn't my school's thread and I'm not an objective party, but I take issue with this. Lots of applicants are ignorant about legal hiring. Even the more informed ones are often just parroting things they have learned from law students and lawyers without doing any critical thinking of their own. Take clerkships for example: a lot of 0Ls value clerkships very highly and seek them out in choosing a school, but only because someone told them they should value them very highly and should seek them out. These same 0Ls haven't thought through why a clerkship is valuable to them and how it fits into their career goals. They also haven't thought through the downsides of clerking ($50k+ in foregone income which is a significant chunk of change for people with $250k+ debt, often moving to some random part of the country for a year, etc). I'm not saying the poster here hasn't thought clerking through, but with this in mind I think it absolutely makes sense to ask "why?" and question 0Ls. Often times the answer behind the facade will merely be that the person is chasing a brass ring because law students and lawyers have told them that clerking is a brass ring.

A thousand times this.

No idea what has led clerkship chances have become such a metric for 0Ls. It makes no sense. Except when you realize that law students are all about brass-ring chasing. It is crazy that despite TLS's best efforts, 0Ls are still generally so ill-informed about what legal hiring is all about.

[20141023]

.