Top Law Schools

shntn wrote:

cusenation wrote:FWIW I've never heard of any law student receiving need-based grants at any school

I've been offered some.

I stand corrected

cusenation wrote:

JayJones78 wrote:Anyone knows if WashU gives need based aid at all? So far I see a wide range of schools that do and don't

I'm not sure to be honest. It seems like need-based aid is just a euphemism for Federal Loans at most schools. I don't think law schools give out need-based aid in the form of grants. FWIW I've never heard of any law student receiving need-based grants at any school

edit: nvm. shntn, i want your life.

cusenation wrote:

JayJones78 wrote:Anyone knows if WashU gives need based aid at all? So far I see a wide range of schools that do and don't

I'm not sure to be honest. It seems like need-based aid is just a euphemism for Federal Loans at most schools. I don't think law schools give out need-based aid in the form of grants. FWIW I've never heard of any law student receiving need-based grants at any school

Someone at the UCLA thread wrote that they offered him 21K in need based aid post FAFSA submission

One of my friends is finishing up a school-funded fellowship at a T-30 this month. (Since February is conveniently the 9-month mark from graduation)

Hasn't had any luck finding any employment in a major market that he has ties to and that the school is in. It's discouraging to see because he's had an extremely difficult time selling himself to employers. Being in a fellowship seems sort of like a black mark on your resume. Employers know what these positions are for..so they don't place any value in the experience he gained from it.

The fact that a lot of these schools put so many students in these programs is discouraging not necessarily because these fellowships exist, because it's better than nothing right? But because the CSO is completely pre-occupied with current 3L's and 2L's and the fellowship students become such a low priority...

cusenation wrote:One of my friends is finishing up a school-funded fellowship at a T-30 this month. (Since February is conveniently the 9-month mark from graduation)

Hasn't had any luck finding any employment in a major market that he has ties to and that the school is in. It's discouraging to see because he's had an extremely difficult time selling himself to employers. Being in a fellowship seems sort of like a black mark on your resume. Employers know what these positions are for..so they don't place any value in the experience he gained from it.

The fact that a lot of these schools put so many students in these programs is discouraging not necessarily because these fellowships exist, because it's better than nothing right? But because the CSO is completely pre-occupied with current 3L's and 2L's and the fellowship students become such a low priority...

That sucks for your friend man, I'm sorry. We all know the employment numbers but its so much more depressing hearing the individual stories.

wannabelawstudent wrote:That sucks for your friend man, I'm sorry. We all know the employment numbers but its so much more depressing hearing the individual stories.

Oh, he was top 50% his 1L and top 30% for 2L and onward, just to provide some perspective. Ironically he said he performed much better after he stopped trying so hard

cusenation wrote:

wannabelawstudent wrote:That sucks for your friend man, I'm sorry. We all know the employment numbers but its so much more depressing hearing the individual stories.

Oh, he was top 50% his 1L and top 30% for 2L and onward, just to provide some perspective. Ironically he said he performed much better after he stopped trying so hard

That's depressing. There's a foolish, wide-eyed and bushy tailed part of me that just hopes the legal market will miraculously boom by our 2L OCI.

Don't worry guys. With the decreasing applicants, smallers classes sizes, well be fine. Plus the economys gonna improve, we're all gonna have a ton of jobs.

If all else fails just slip antifreeze into the drinks of half of your class and suddenly jerbs = graduates. nbd.

JayJones78 wrote:Anyone knows if WashU gives need based aid at all? So far I see a wide range of schools that do and don't

Wash U doesn't give any need based aid, as far as I am aware. I've never heard of it happening.

cusenation wrote:One of my friends is finishing up a school-funded fellowship at a T-30 this month. (Since February is conveniently the 9-month mark from graduation)

Hasn't had any luck finding any employment in a major market that he has ties to and that the school is in. It's discouraging to see because he's had an extremely difficult time selling himself to employers. Being in a fellowship seems sort of like a black mark on your resume. Employers know what these positions are for..so they don't place any value in the experience he gained from it.

The fact that a lot of these schools put so many students in these programs is discouraging not necessarily because these fellowships exist, because it's better than nothing right? But because the CSO is completely pre-occupied with current 3L's and 2L's and the fellowship students become such a low priority...

Thats rough, but its a reminder that the legal market is still depressed even though it seems things are a bit better than the past 2 years. Sorry to hear about your friend.

http://www.law-school-hacker.com/top-ra ... hools.html

Now, by “top ranked law schools,” I mean elite, national law schools--name-brand schools with the most prestige that give their students the most career opportunities.

People may disagree with this list, but any disagreement will be with law schools that I left off. No lawyer can seriously argue that the schools that are on my list of top ranked law schools don't belong on it at all.

........but in short: forget this rankings game. The actual list of truly elite, national top ranked law schools is fixed, and it rarely changes.

Some details about author:
-Harvard undergrad
-magna cum laude NYU Law, Exec Board of NYU law review, Order of the Coif
-Two federal clerkships
-Debevoise Plimpton
-Investment Banker before law school

Some of his logic seems a bit dated, but I do like clumps over pure USNWR rank.

shntn wrote:Some of his logic seems a bit dated, but I do like clumps over pure USNWR rank.

Yeah he's older so it's likely that his logic might be slightly dated...but I know that this was all published after the recession. But his knowledge of firm hiring was probably mostly accumulated from before.

cusenation wrote:http://www.law-school-hacker.com/top-ra ... hools.html

Now, by “top ranked law schools,” I mean elite, national law schools--name-brand schools with the most prestige that give their students the most career opportunities.

People may disagree with this list, but any disagreement will be with law schools that I left off. No lawyer can seriously argue that the schools that are on my list of top ranked law schools don't belong on it at all.

........but in short: forget this rankings game. The actual list of truly elite, national top ranked law schools is fixed, and it rarely changes.

Some details about author:
-Harvard undergrad
-magna cum laude NYU Law, Exec Board of NYU law review, Order of the Coif
-Two federal clerkships
-Debevoise Plimpton
-Investment Banker before law school

EGREGIOUS anti-Penn and anti-Texas bent.

shifty_eyed wrote: EGREGIOUS anti-Penn and anti-Texas bent.

+1 to the Penn statement. But disagree about Texas

At the risk of infuriating any Texas fans...Texas-Austin isn't necessarily a true national school in terms of placement. It's USNWR rank is great, but it's prestige and placement is fairly limited to the South. Again, I'm making the distinction between a Top school versus a national school. UT-Austin is undeniable a top school with great job prospects...but I would hesitate to say that it's a national one.

cusenation wrote:

shntn wrote:Some of his logic seems a bit dated, but I do like clumps over pure USNWR rank.

Yeah he's older so it's likely that his logic might be slightly dated...but I know that this was all published after the recession. But his knowledge of firm hiring was probably mostly accumulated from before.

Why doesn't it state when this was published?
Plus he leaves out WashU in his explantion of "the honorable" schools at the bottom

Thanks for the link!

cusenation wrote:

shifty_eyed wrote: EGREGIOUS anti-Penn and anti-Texas bent.

+1 to the Penn statement. But disagree about Texas

At the risk of infuriating any Texas fans...Texas-Austin isn't necessarily a true national school in terms of placement. It's USNWR rank is great, but it's prestige and placement is fairly limited to the South. Again, I'm making the distinction between a Top school versus a national school. UT-Austin is undeniable a top school with great job prospects...but I would hesitate to say that it's a national one.

UT places 5% in NY, 4.7% in CA, and 4.7% in DC. 62% stay in Texas, largely due to self-selection. WUSTL places 25.6% in MO, 8.5% in IL, and 8.8% in DC. I couldn't find statistics on CA and NY, but I imagine they are very similar to Texas. While I think Texas is THE superior law school in its region, I would ALSO say it is A top school nationally. UCLA is considered a national law school, and it places 77% in CA.

shifty_eyed wrote:

cusenation wrote:

shifty_eyed wrote: EGREGIOUS anti-Penn and anti-Texas bent.

+1 to the Penn statement. But disagree about Texas

At the risk of infuriating any Texas fans...Texas-Austin isn't necessarily a true national school in terms of placement. It's USNWR rank is great, but it's prestige and placement is fairly limited to the South. Again, I'm making the distinction between a Top school versus a national school. UT-Austin is undeniable a top school with great job prospects...but I would hesitate to say that it's a national one.

UT places 5% in NY, 4.7% in CA, and 4.7% in DC. 62% stay in Texas, largely due to self-selection. WUSTL places 25.6% in MO, 8.5% in IL, and 8.8% in DC. I couldn't find statistics on CA and NY, but I imagine they are very similar to Texas. While I think Texas is THE superior law school in its region, I would ALSO say it is A top school nationally.

He put Texas in Clump 4b further down the page under the explanation section. I guess it was a typo that he left it off the list at the top.

Jaqen wrote:

shifty_eyed wrote:

cusenation wrote:

shifty_eyed wrote: EGREGIOUS anti-Penn and anti-Texas bent.

+1 to the Penn statement. But disagree about Texas

At the risk of infuriating any Texas fans...Texas-Austin isn't necessarily a true national school in terms of placement. It's USNWR rank is great, but it's prestige and placement is fairly limited to the South. Again, I'm making the distinction between a Top school versus a national school. UT-Austin is undeniable a top school with great job prospects...but I would hesitate to say that it's a national one.

UT places 5% in NY, 4.7% in CA, and 4.7% in DC. 62% stay in Texas, largely due to self-selection. WUSTL places 25.6% in MO, 8.5% in IL, and 8.8% in DC. I couldn't find statistics on CA and NY, but I imagine they are very similar to Texas. While I think Texas is THE superior law school in its region, I would ALSO say it is A top school nationally.

He put Texas in Clump 4b further down the page under the explanation section. I guess it was a typo that he left it off the list at the top.

Well THAT I can agree with

I think very few law schools are TRULY national (HYS), but schools like WUSTL, Vandy, Texas, UCLA are national in the sense that employers nationwide will recognize and respect the school, and with ties to the region will be willing to hire you.

JayJones78 wrote: Why doesn't it state when this was published?
Plus he leaves out WashU in his explantion of "the honorable" schools at the bottom

Thanks for the link!

Not sure why it doesn't state publication date. But if you look at other articles regarding loans and stuff, it's clear that the site was published after the legal economy went to hell. And I remember emailing him about that last year, it was a typo that it was left out in the end.

Note i'm not actually posting this link to boost WUSTL. But I think the page mirrors the opinions of what a lot of attorneys would tell you. Law school prestige is almost always fixed. Regardless of the slight changes in the U.S News Rankings, older/more prestigious universities have an advantage just by virtue of their age and general prestige.

This isn't authoritative obviously, but I've talked to a few partners (all T-14 pedigree) at different firms..and it's clear that none of them give a crap about what the U.S News publishes...the top law schools are the top schools..and will remain that way barring some extreme change. Partners are old and their perspectives on prestige reflect their age. Until there's major demographic change in law firm partnership, schools like UW will never be considered in the same tier as these old-money, old-prestige universities.

To reiterate, this isn't to toot WUSTL's horn, or any other school. I'm just saying that even though the new rankings are coming out soon, ppl should remember that law school prestige is generally static.

ETA: Sincere apologies to Texas fans, completely missed the addition later. Didn't mean to imply in anyway that Texas isn't a top school

Damn there is a lot of law school specific sites out there. Too many to keep up with. Why does everyone feel the need to make a blog? Should I make a blog?

wannabelawstudent wrote:Damn there is a lot of law school specific sites out there. Too many to keep up with. Why does everyone feel the need to make a blog? Should I make a blog?

Make a blog about all of the different law school blogs.

LaMuSayonga wrote:

wannabelawstudent wrote:Damn there is a lot of law school specific sites out there. Too many to keep up with. Why does everyone feel the need to make a blog? Should I make a blog?

Make a blog about all of the different law school blogs.

I feel like all blogs start with this great promise and then 99% of them die.

Wannabe maybe you'll be the next http://thepioneerwoman.com/ !!