WUSTL Recent Grad (and others) Taking Questions Forum

[theycallmefoes]

Does WUSTL interview all applicants? If not, what does it mean to be asked/not asked to interview?

You may have more success asking in the applicant thread. It seems "more" required than it used to be. I never interviewed fwiw.

Thanks for the tip - very helpful thread.

[bulinus]

No interview here, either. Applied and got in last cycle.

[DoveBodyWash]

oh wisdomous elders,

what are people's thoughts towards being a research assistant for 1L summer? Bad? good? Doesn't matter?

[TatteredDignity]

oh wisdomous elders,

what are people's thoughts towards being a research assistant for 1L summer? Bad? good? Doesn't matter?

Good if you care about clerking and the prof is connected. Otherwise, will probably neither help nor hurt for OCI. 1L summer experience is all about how you spin it.

[sublime]

..

[TatteredDignity]

oh wisdomous elders,

what are people's thoughts towards being a research assistant for 1L summer? Bad? good? Doesn't matter?

Good if you care about clerking and the prof is connected. Otherwise, will probably neither help nor hurt for OCI. 1L summer experience is all about how you spin it.

I turned down the opportunity to apply with a super connected prof. My main issue is that my resume is already super research heavy and felt like I needed to diversify. I also didn't want to lock myself into something so early. May end up regretting it though.

Well, I suppose we'll have to reevaluate your decision ten years from now

[TheZoid]

oh wisdomous elders,

what are people's thoughts towards being a research assistant for 1L summer? Bad? good? Doesn't matter?

I did it and I'm glad I did. Obviously you shouldn't turn down an SA on the off chance you have that opportunity, but personally I thought it was a great experience, for a couple reasons. First, even if the prof isn't super connected, they may be a good recommendation if you plan to clerk, and frankly, they'll probably get to know you better than any of your doctrinal profs, unless you're a gunner and live in their office. Also, to the extent you can do something relevant to what you actually want to do (e.g. corporate, international human rights (lol), etc.), it can help you craft a good story going into OCI about what you want to do, and you might actually sound like you have a clue as to what it's about. Basically all of my OCI interviewers asked about my RA work, and I thought it was a good talking point and fit nicely into my explanation about what I wanted to do and why.

[Otunga]

For someone preferring Boston and with local ties to the area (Rhode Islander), would WUSTL make sense over BU/BC given a sufficiently less COA? I would think, all else being equal, that BU/BC are better options since you have all year to network in the area. But since stuff is never that way, should WUSTL be given serious consideration over BU/BC for someone in my case?

[Birdnals]

I think RA is a solid summer job.

Pros:
1. It pays. I definitely got more than the stipend during summer. It doesn't pay much, but it is better than nothing
2. Will get you in good with a prof. Lots of these profs are connected either with firms or with the judiciary. I know people who got interviews/call backs after being skipped over for OCI screeners because heir prof made a call for them. It's never a bad thing to have a prof willing to go to bat for you.
3. Work is generally flexible time-wise.
4. Work it relatively interesting. At least, more so than doc review.
5. Job can continue part-time during school year. A little extra cash in your pocket.
6. Seemed to be either a pro or at least not a con at OCI. As with any 1L job outside of SA, it is mostly how you spin it.
7. Makes you a near-expert on areas of law which are good talking points for interviews/ networking.

Cons:
1. Doesn't pay well. Better than stipend, but worse than even small firms.
2. Work doesn't translate into firm work. I don't feel disadvantaged going into my 2L summer job, but I also don't feel especially "experienced" either.
3. If you don't like scholarly work, you will not enjoy the material.
4. Monotonous. Prof will prob have 1 or 2 things he/she wants to focus on that summer and everything you do will be on that subject. Not much variety of assignments probably.


When summer was getting close I had the choice between RA'ing and going back to the mid-sized firm in a different city I worked at before law school. I chose RA'ing and I am really happy with my decision. Especially if for people who want to stay in St. Louis/ establish better ties.

[notedgarfigaro]

For someone preferring Boston and with local ties to the area (Rhode Islander), would WUSTL make sense over BU/BC given a sufficiently less COA? I would think, all else being equal, that BU/BC are better options since you have all year to network in the area. But since stuff is never that way, should WUSTL be given serious consideration over BU/BC for someone in my case?

It would have to be a big difference in COA to justify it in my mind. I know people get to Boston from WUSTL, but you already pointed out why BC/BU is the better choice- you're there, so you'll have so much more contact with people in the Boston legal market.

[Cellar-door]

For someone preferring Boston and with local ties to the area (Rhode Islander), would WUSTL make sense over BU/BC given a sufficiently less COA? I would think, all else being equal, that BU/BC are better options since you have all year to network in the area. But since stuff is never that way, should WUSTL be given serious consideration over BU/BC for someone in my case?

probably depends a little on what you want, big Law such as it is in Boston it likely won't matter as they'll go about the same depth, but mid/small, government, etc will go deeper into the class at Boston schools, and you'll be able to network more.

It'll come down to the price difference, and how locked into Boston you are.

If you are locked in to Boston don't go to WUSTL, top 15-20% should get you there, maybe deeper especially if the firm has a WUSTL connect, but making a decision based on being anything other than median is a bad idea.
On the other hand, if you are open to working somewhere else, either long term or for 3-5 years then having less debt is always nice.


I'm assuming you have no shot at Harvard even with a re-take?

[Otunga]

For someone preferring Boston and with local ties to the area (Rhode Islander), would WUSTL make sense over BU/BC given a sufficiently less COA? I would think, all else being equal, that BU/BC are better options since you have all year to network in the area. But since stuff is never that way, should WUSTL be given serious consideration over BU/BC for someone in my case?

probably depends a little on what you want, big Law such as it is in Boston it likely won't matter as they'll go about the same depth, but mid/small, government, etc will go deeper into the class at Boston schools, and you'll be able to network more.

It'll come down to the price difference, and how locked into Boston you are.

If you are locked in to Boston don't go to WUSTL, top 15-20% should get you there, maybe deeper especially if the firm has a WUSTL connect, but making a decision based on being anything other than median is a bad idea.
On the other hand, if you are open to working somewhere else, either long term or for 3-5 years then having less debt is always nice.


I'm assuming you have no shot at Harvard even with a re-take?

I would have a H chance. I scored 168 in Oct and 165 in Dec. That latter score got me down as I vaguely thought I had at least gotten around the same score. My PT avg was around 171/172 going into each test. GPA is 3.9X.

Boston biglaw is a primary aim but it's not a landslide. If I didn't get it, I'd probably try for another form of firm work in RI or elsewhere in Mass.

If WUSTL would be something like at least 15-20K cheaper in overall COA, then I think I'd consider it. You guys think that's not cheap enough?

[Cellar-door]

For someone preferring Boston and with local ties to the area (Rhode Islander), would WUSTL make sense over BU/BC given a sufficiently less COA? I would think, all else being equal, that BU/BC are better options since you have all year to network in the area. But since stuff is never that way, should WUSTL be given serious consideration over BU/BC for someone in my case?

probably depends a little on what you want, big Law such as it is in Boston it likely won't matter as they'll go about the same depth, but mid/small, government, etc will go deeper into the class at Boston schools, and you'll be able to network more.

It'll come down to the price difference, and how locked into Boston you are.

If you are locked in to Boston don't go to WUSTL, top 15-20% should get you there, maybe deeper especially if the firm has a WUSTL connect, but making a decision based on being anything other than median is a bad idea.
On the other hand, if you are open to working somewhere else, either long term or for 3-5 years then having less debt is always nice.


I'm assuming you have no shot at Harvard even with a re-take?

I would have a H chance. I scored 168 in Oct and 165 in Dec. That latter score got me down as I vaguely thought I had at least gotten around the same score. My PT avg was around 171/172 going into each test. GPA is 3.9X.

Boston biglaw is a primary aim but it's not a landslide. If I didn't get it, I'd probably try for another form of firm work in RI or elsewhere in Mass.

If WUSTL would be something like at least 15-20K cheaper in overall COA, then I think I'd consider it. You guys think that's not cheap enough?

You have a 3.9 then you should re-take, even sit out a round. a 3.9 and something in the 170s will open a lot of doors in the T14. Probably all of them are better for the Boston market.

[Otunga]

For someone preferring Boston and with local ties to the area (Rhode Islander), would WUSTL make sense over BU/BC given a sufficiently less COA? I would think, all else being equal, that BU/BC are better options since you have all year to network in the area. But since stuff is never that way, should WUSTL be given serious consideration over BU/BC for someone in my case?

probably depends a little on what you want, big Law such as it is in Boston it likely won't matter as they'll go about the same depth, but mid/small, government, etc will go deeper into the class at Boston schools, and you'll be able to network more.

It'll come down to the price difference, and how locked into Boston you are.

If you are locked in to Boston don't go to WUSTL, top 15-20% should get you there, maybe deeper especially if the firm has a WUSTL connect, but making a decision based on being anything other than median is a bad idea.
On the other hand, if you are open to working somewhere else, either long term or for 3-5 years then having less debt is always nice.


I'm assuming you have no shot at Harvard even with a re-take?

I would have a H chance. I scored 168 in Oct and 165 in Dec. That latter score got me down as I vaguely thought I had at least gotten around the same score. My PT avg was around 171/172 going into each test. GPA is 3.9X.

Boston biglaw is a primary aim but it's not a landslide. If I didn't get it, I'd probably try for another form of firm work in RI or elsewhere in Mass.

If WUSTL would be something like at least 15-20K cheaper in overall COA, then I think I'd consider it. You guys think that's not cheap enough?

You have a 3.9 then you should re-take, even sit out a round. a 3.9 and something in the 170s will open a lot of doors in the T14. Probably all of them are better for the Boston market.

I get the sentiment. I simply think I maxed out my score. I studied for something like 6-9 months (Not sure if you should count all 9 since for some of that the study quality was shit) and took most PTs that are out there, seeing the material in some form from 52-current up to four times each (incl. drilling and PTing). Diag. was 149. Did the Cambridge packets for LR and LG blah blah. I know there's little downside to a 3rd 170s retake other than probably not getting into YS anyway (my softs are below average relative to t14 apps and likely average relative to the overall pool) which isn't even a downside because I'm not getting in as is. People would look at me like I'm nuts if I did a retake but that's not detering me.

[dietcoke0]

You can always apply, retake, then withdraw if you get what you are looking for.

For 3.9x, and PTing above 170, no reason to not use your last attempt. I had a friend 171 and less than 3.9 get big schollie at Penn, and in at Harvard. You could get a full ride at Wash U with 168/3.9, however you are limiting yourself from getting into the Boston market.

It's possible with top 10-20%, but it's a lot easier, AND a chance to land more prestigious employment coming from a better ranked school.

There's a reason why those with big scholarships at Wash U transfer to T14 schools for stickers. While you may be risk adverse, which is fine, you still have shots for scholarships with a 172-3.

[DoveBodyWash]

What's the conventional wisdom regarding 1L OCI interviews for kids who aren't from here? On one hand, I don't wanna lie and shout my love for STL/Midwest to the heavens (would it even matter if i did anyway?). But on the other hand, I want to at least try to get an offer from one of these firms. In truth I haven't been in the area long enough to say with certainty whether i wanna stay or leave, so what's proper approach here?

[Birdnals]

What's the conventional wisdom regarding 1L OCI interviews for kids who aren't from here? On one hand, I don't wanna lie and shout my love for STL/Midwest to the heavens (would it even matter if i did anyway?). But on the other hand, I want to at least try to get an offer from one of these firms. In truth I haven't been in the area long enough to say with certainty whether i wanna stay or leave, so what's proper approach here?

If it is public interest/government then tell the truth about your commitment to St. Louis. They almost certainly aren't looking to hire you long term and will appreciate the candor.

For firms, lie and shot from the rooftops how much you want to live in St. Louis for the rest of your life. They will probably see through it, but it is your job to convince them that if they invest training resources in you by hiring you that investment is going to bear fruit in you working for them long-term if they offer you a position post-grad. The best way to assure you don't get an offer is to say "I like St. Louis, but I haven't been here long enough to say with certainty that I would want to spend my career here."

[dietcoke0]

What's the conventional wisdom regarding 1L OCI interviews for kids who aren't from here? On one hand, I don't wanna lie and shout my love for STL/Midwest to the heavens (would it even matter if i did anyway?). But on the other hand, I want to at least try to get an offer from one of these firms. In truth I haven't been in the area long enough to say with certainty whether i wanna stay or leave, so what's proper approach here?

If it is public interest/government then tell the truth about your commitment to St. Louis. They almost certainly aren't looking to hire you long term and will appreciate the candor.

For firms, lie and shot from the rooftops how much you want to live in St. Louis for the rest of your life. They will probably see through it, but it is your job to convince them that if they invest training resources in you by hiring you that investment is going to bear fruit in you working for them long-term if they offer you a position post-grad. The best way to assure you don't get an offer is to say "I like St. Louis, but I haven't been here long enough to say with certainty that I would want to spend my career here."

Pretty much this. Non-profits just looking for help to work on limited budgets, and don't care about why you are there. They aren't going to ask you why St. Louis.

For bigger firms, they are looking to possibly groom you and are trying you out for size, so rip any thing you can. My best friend is here, and want to be next to him/her, my great aunt lives here, and I'm really close to her. I used to visit when I was a child, and fell in love with the city. Baseball is my favorite sport, and want to live in a baseball town. I LOVE arches. Really try to play up that you turned down other schools to specifically come to Wash U.

But generally, I think it's pretty insular at the bigger firms, and the general consensus is that they are too distrusting, even with pretty extreme measures (buying houses and all that). But if you truly want to work in St. Louis, smaller firms don't really care as much, and I never was asked. Also, if you do want to work in St. Louis, I would stay in town for 1L summer too.

[DoveBodyWash]

What's the conventional wisdom regarding 1L OCI interviews for kids who aren't from here? On one hand, I don't wanna lie and shout my love for STL/Midwest to the heavens (would it even matter if i did anyway?). But on the other hand, I want to at least try to get an offer from one of these firms. In truth I haven't been in the area long enough to say with certainty whether i wanna stay or leave, so what's proper approach here?

If it is public interest/government then tell the truth about your commitment to St. Louis. They almost certainly aren't looking to hire you long term and will appreciate the candor.

For firms, lie and shot from the rooftops how much you want to live in St. Louis for the rest of your life. They will probably see through it, but it is your job to convince them that if they invest training resources in you by hiring you that investment is going to bear fruit in you working for them long-term if they offer you a position post-grad. The best way to assure you don't get an offer is to say "I like St. Louis, but I haven't been here long enough to say with certainty that I would want to spend my career here."

Pretty much this. Non-profits just looking for help to work on limited budgets, and don't care about why you are there. They aren't going to ask you why St. Louis.

For bigger firms, they are looking to possibly groom you and are trying you out for size, so rip any thing you can. My best friend is here, and want to be next to him/her, my great aunt lives here, and I'm really close to her. I used to visit when I was a child, and fell in love with the city. Baseball is my favorite sport, and want to live in a baseball town. I LOVE arches. Really try to play up that you turned down other schools to specifically come to Wash U.

But generally, I think it's pretty insular at the bigger firms, and the general consensus is that they are too distrusting, even with pretty extreme measures (buying houses and all that). But if you truly want to work in St. Louis, smaller firms don't really care as much, and I never was asked. Also, if you do want to work in St. Louis, I would stay in town for 1L summer too.

Why do they bother pre-selecting us in the first place?? Even if the school requires that employers interview a certain number of students, why do they bother pre-selecting outsiders at all? This is what kind of frustrates me. If they're not going to consider us, then why not give those pre-selects to classmates from St. Louis, even if their grades are slightly lower? I wouldn't be opposed to turning down my spot if i knew that a classmate who really wanted to stay here would get it instead.

[Birdnals]

Why do they bother pre-selecting us in the first place?? Even if the school requires that employers interview a certain number of students, why do they bother pre-selecting outsiders at all? This is what kind of frustrates me. If they're not going to consider us, then why not give those pre-selects to classmates from St. Louis, even if their grades are slightly lower? I wouldn't be opposed to turning down my spot if i knew that a classmate who really wanted to stay here would get it instead.

1. They want to keep recruiting at Wustl in the future, so they don't want to give the finger to career services by not using all the spots they are given.

2. It's not always readily apparent who outsiders are vs. people with ties. Maybe they moved away from St. Louis right before HS but still have a ton of family here? You can't always know from a resume/cover letter who has ties.

3. Sometimes, despite everything, an interviewer really clicks with a non-native and feels he/she would be perfect for the firm. The interviewer going to be at the school all day anyways, no point in limiting the firm's options. An interview is about convincing the person interviewing you that you are a perfect fit for the job and will make the company better. For law firms, that means convincing them you are worth their investment and aren't going to take their training resources and run for greener pastures at your first chance.

[hoos89]

.

[DoveBodyWash]

Why do they bother pre-selecting us in the first place?? Even if the school requires that employers interview a certain number of students, why do they bother pre-selecting outsiders at all? This is what kind of frustrates me. If they're not going to consider us, then why not give those pre-selects to classmates from St. Louis, even if their grades are slightly lower? I wouldn't be opposed to turning down my spot if i knew that a classmate who really wanted to stay here would get it instead.

1. They want to keep recruiting at Wustl in the future, so they don't want to give the finger to career services by not using all the spots they are given.

2. It's not always readily apparent who outsiders are vs. people with ties. Maybe they moved away from St. Louis right before HS but still have a ton of family here? You can't always know from a resume/cover letter who has ties.

3. Sometimes, despite everything, an interviewer really clicks with a non-native and feels he/she would be perfect for the firm. He/she going to be at the school all day anyways, no point in limiting the firm's options. An interview is about convincing the person interviewing you that you are a perfect fir for the job and will make the company better. For law firms, that means convincing them you are worth their investment and aren't going to take their training resources and run for greener pastures at your first chance.

Sigh...I guess...

[notedgarfigaro]

Why do they bother pre-selecting us in the first place?? Even if the school requires that employers interview a certain number of students, why do they bother pre-selecting outsiders at all? This is what kind of frustrates me. If they're not going to consider us, then why not give those pre-selects to classmates from St. Louis, even if their grades are slightly lower? I wouldn't be opposed to turning down my spot if i knew that a classmate who really wanted to stay here would get it instead.

1. They want to keep recruiting at Wustl in the future, so they don't want to give the finger to career services by not using all the spots they are given.

2. It's not always readily apparent who outsiders are vs. people with ties. Maybe they moved away from St. Louis right before HS but still have a ton of family here? You can't always know from a resume/cover letter who has ties.

3. Sometimes, despite everything, an interviewer really clicks with a non-native and feels he/she would be perfect for the firm. He/she going to be at the school all day anyways, no point in limiting the firm's options. An interview is about convincing the person interviewing you that you are a perfect fir for the job and will make the company better. For law firms, that means convincing them you are worth their investment and aren't going to take their training resources and run for greener pastures at your first chance.

Sigh...I guess...

Hey, you're in a good place if you're getting 1L firm interviews...at the very least, it's interview practice.

Unless you're paying for travel out of pocket or just have 1234523452 of them, it's never a bad thing to have an interview.

[couchpizza]

Hey guys, I'm a 0L seriously considering WUSTL with questions about job placement:

(1) I have no ties to STL at all but I have visited and loved my time there. Would it be possible to land a firm gig in STL without any ties?
(2) Does WUSTL place well in Chicago? How about the northeast?
(3) I noticed a surprisingly low BF/FC percentage for WUSTL, is that because many students are genuinely not interested in those types of positions or are they simply hard to come by?
(4) I saw a lot of stuff on their site regarding tailored programs for the location of practice/area of law the student is interested in practicing in. Has WUSTL gained/ is it gaining more national traction over the last few years?

Thanks

[hoos89]

.