Yeah I think the quality of clerkships argument is much more compelling than % or class size alone (or even together for that matter) if you're looking to pick a school based on clerkship opportunity.Pozzo wrote:Not sure that data is readily available, so outcomes is all we really have to go on. You might be able to get some anecdata over on the clerkship board or the HLS/YLS threads "Ask a Law Student" board.seeprybyrun wrote:I'm curious what percentage of the class in each of these schools applies for clerkships. If 60% of Yale grads apply but only 40% get one, that's as good as 45% of Harvard grads applying and 15% getting one.Rigo wrote:Some lawyers can do math, I swear!Pozzo wrote:Opposite, actually. Raw numbers don't mean much unless class size is taken into account.unrelated wrote:Aren't clerkship percentages kinda pointless unless class size is also taken into account? 16% of Harvard class and 19% of UVA class are both higher total numbers than S and Y.acz26 wrote:Rigo wrote:Harvard clerking numbers aren't even that much better than Virginia so I don't think that'd be worth the money at all.
16% v. 19%
Compared to 26% for S and 34% for Y
Where are you getting these numbers from...Stanford posts 35% on its website, and Yale has about 40% on its website, I believe. Harvard's is also higher
And if my math is right (which it may not be--it's been a long week), it would actually be more like 60% applied/40% successful and 45% applied/30% successful.
e: FWIW, there is data on the per capita placement and overall placement for Supreme Court Clerks here. Harvard and Yale have placed almost the same number of SCCs over the 10 year period, but the per capita rate is much higher for Y due to its small size. S's per capita rate is on par with H.
Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017) Forum
- unrelated
- Posts: 113
- Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2016 1:05 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
-
- Posts: 16639
- Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:19 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
You don't just GET a SCOTUS clerkship though out of school. You clerk for at least a couple years generally with a feeder judge and apply your way up the chain. Sure all three schools could get you a clerkship but it's all around easier at S & Y simply because the small class sizes help to foster a closer professor-student relationship that is essential for landing clerkships.unrelated wrote: Yeah I think the quality of clerkships argument is much more compelling than % or class size alone (or even together for that matter) if you're looking to pick a school based on clerkship opportunity.
It's silly to imply that any A3 clerkship is low quality too.
-
- Posts: 1918
- Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 3:36 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
The SCOTUS clerks have by and large clerked before, but there is some proxy value here because these are the people getting placed into the types of clerkships that make SCOTUS a possibility down the road.Rigo wrote:You don't just GET a SCOTUS clerkship though out of school. You clerk for at least a couple years generally with a feeder judge and apply your way up the chain. Sure all three schools could get you a clerkship but it's all around easier at S & Y simply because the small class sizes help to foster a closer professor-student relationship that is essential for landing clerkships.unrelated wrote: Yeah I think the quality of clerkships argument is much more compelling than % or class size alone (or even together for that matter) if you're looking to pick a school based on clerkship opportunity.
Anyhow, for the sake of the rest of the waiters, we should probably move this convo elsewhere, so anyone sub'd to this thread isn't panicking every time there's a notification.
-
- Posts: 16639
- Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:19 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
The only reason I brought this up was for the poster who asked a quasi-choosing question.
I said that H clerkship chances are only 3% better than at UVA so to take the Dillard and run.
Maybe ride out S or Y waitlists. Hell, ride out H waitlist too!
I was just simply stating clerkship likelihood.
I said that H clerkship chances are only 3% better than at UVA so to take the Dillard and run.
Maybe ride out S or Y waitlists. Hell, ride out H waitlist too!
I was just simply stating clerkship likelihood.
-
- Posts: 16639
- Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:19 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
True true.Pozzo wrote:Anyhow, for the sake of the rest of the waiters, we should probably move this convo elsewhere, so anyone sub'd to this thread isn't panicking every time there's a notification.
TLS protip: don't subscribe. Simply use the "view your posts" tab for updates. No push notification type mess.
Last edited by Rigo on Fri Mar 31, 2017 7:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- Thomas Hagan, ESQ.
- Posts: 1225
- Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 1:55 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
Hmmm could it also be self-selection though? No doubt that you're fine at UVA if you want a clerkship but idk if "clerkship chances are only 3% better" at HLS hahaRigo wrote:The only reason I brought this up was for the poster who asked a quasi-choosing question.
I said that H clerkship chances are only 3% better than at UVA so to take the Dillard and run.
Maybe ride out S or Y waitlists. Hell, ride out H waitlist too!
I was just simply stating clerkship likelihood.
-
- Posts: 16639
- Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:19 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
Idk why Harvard students would especially self select out of clerking since it's known for prestige whores.Thomas Hagan, ESQ. wrote:Hmmm could it also be self-selection though? No doubt that you're fine at UVA if you want a clerkship but idk if "clerkship chances are only 3% better" at HLS hahaRigo wrote:The only reason I brought this up was for the poster who asked a quasi-choosing question.
I said that H clerkship chances are only 3% better than at UVA so to take the Dillard and run.
Maybe ride out S or Y waitlists. Hell, ride out H waitlist too!
I was just simply stating clerkship likelihood.
But it's all speculation and therefore fruitless to debate here and now. Make a thread!
-
- Posts: 1918
- Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 3:36 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
Yep, I fault only myself for pushing it so off course. Dillard over H at sticker is sage advice.Rigo wrote:The only reason I brought this up was for the poster who asked a quasi-choosing question.
I said that H clerkship chances are only 3% better than at UVA so to take the Dillard and run.
Maybe ride out S or Y waitlists. Hell, ride out H waitlist too!
I was just simply stating clerkship likelihood.
-
- Posts: 109
- Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 8:04 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
Most likely self selection. Harvard has a lot more people in the lst reports listed as taking a public interest job than uva, for example.
something somthing heterogeneous preferencesRigo wrote:Idk why Harvard students would especially self select out of clerking since it's known for prestige whores.Thomas Hagan, ESQ. wrote:Hmmm could it also be self-selection though? No doubt that you're fine at UVA if you want a clerkship but idk if "clerkship chances are only 3% better" at HLS hahaRigo wrote:The only reason I brought this up was for the poster who asked a quasi-choosing question.
I said that H clerkship chances are only 3% better than at UVA so to take the Dillard and run.
Maybe ride out S or Y waitlists. Hell, ride out H waitlist too!
I was just simply stating clerkship likelihood.
But it's all speculation and therefore fruitless to debate here and now. Make a thread!
-
- Posts: 16639
- Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:19 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
If we're counting govt jobs as PI, then barely.gwillygecko wrote:Most likely self selection. Harvard has a lot more people in the lst reports listed as taking a public interest job than uva, for example.
All things equal or even close, go Harvard all the way.
But it's kind of silly to give up a Dillard if goals are maybe clerking then biglaw and you're debt financing.
This is discussed ad nauseum in nearly every high stat choosing thread though.
I envy the full scholly people.
-
- Posts: 109
- Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 8:04 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
govt jobs arent public interest IMO, but i agree with the larger point!
-
- Posts: 16639
- Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:19 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
but but but I wanna serve the public!gwillygecko wrote:govt jobs arent public interest IMO, but i agree with the larger point!
-
- Posts: 68
- Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2017 12:54 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
Just to confirm, is it over? Everyone WL or dinged? Or still some people waiting to hear back?
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 628
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:15 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
Mid 160s. 3.9 What are my chances off WL? LSN doesn't look good. Why do they WL ppl with my stats? Any chance at admit?
PLS DONT QUOTE!
PLS DONT QUOTE!
-
- Posts: 130
- Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 1:28 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
For a broad look at your numbers, from the 2014 compilation thread:
• During the past three cycles, 80 applicants on LSN below that cycle’s LSAT median and at/above that cycle’s GPA median were straight admits while 102 were waitlisted. Of those waitlisted applicants, 18 withdrew from the waitlist and 24 were eventually admitted (28.6% staying on waitlist were admitted).
That said, I can't find any LSN examples in the three most recent cycles of any confirmed waitlists acceptances below 170 (except URM). On the other hand, high LSAT apps are down this year, so who knows how predictive past cycles are, or what happened outside of LSN (or if people just didn't update).
TL,DR: Who knows
• During the past three cycles, 80 applicants on LSN below that cycle’s LSAT median and at/above that cycle’s GPA median were straight admits while 102 were waitlisted. Of those waitlisted applicants, 18 withdrew from the waitlist and 24 were eventually admitted (28.6% staying on waitlist were admitted).
That said, I can't find any LSN examples in the three most recent cycles of any confirmed waitlists acceptances below 170 (except URM). On the other hand, high LSAT apps are down this year, so who knows how predictive past cycles are, or what happened outside of LSN (or if people just didn't update).
TL,DR: Who knows
Last edited by enoca on Sun Apr 02, 2017 10:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 335
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2016 10:07 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
I know of a 167 who was accepted off of WL last year. Lots of we and softs though and I don't know about gpaenoca wrote:For a broad look at your numbers, from the 2014 compilation thread:
• During the past three cycles, 80 applicants on LSN below that cycle’s LSAT median and at/above that cycle’s GPA median were straight admits while 102 were waitlisted. Of those waitlisted applicants, 18 withdrew from the waitlist and 24 were eventually admitted (28.6% staying on waitlist were admitted).
That said, I can't find any LSN examples in the three most recent cycles of any confirmed waitlists acceptances below 170 (except URM). On the other hand, high LSAT apps are down this year, so who knows how predictive past cycles are, or what happened outside of LSN.
TL,DR: Who knows
-
- Posts: 130
- Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 1:28 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
Yeah, it's almost surely possible. Don't let your dreams die just yet.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 371
- Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2017 10:18 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
It seems like there's a past trend of slightly favoring reverse splitters (the one with higher GPA) for admissions off the WL over regular splitters (higher LSAT).
-
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 5:48 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
when are the ASWs?
- hammy393
- Posts: 390
- Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2016 9:51 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
URM who got a js1 but ultimately WL'd. Withdrawing. Good luck to everyone else on the WL!
-
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Thu May 02, 2013 11:25 am
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
Waitlisted.
What are your thoughts on mentioning in the LOCI that I'll be retaking the June LSAT to improve my score?
What are your thoughts on mentioning in the LOCI that I'll be retaking the June LSAT to improve my score?
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 121
- Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2017 4:29 am
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
I think you're setting yourself up for a major negative if you don't improve materially. I would focus on other material updates, if possible. You can always report a better score when you get it.kamy123 wrote:Waitlisted.
What are your thoughts on mentioning in the LOCI that I'll be retaking the June LSAT to improve my score?
-
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2017 7:51 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
Those of you who are waitlisted and opted in, did you get a confirmation email?
- meeseeks
- Posts: 530
- Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 7:06 am
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
I did not.tartan2016 wrote:Those of you who are waitlisted and opted in, did you get a confirmation email?
-
- Posts: 16639
- Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:19 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
Me neither. A lot of people haven't.Mr. Meeseeks wrote:I did not.tartan2016 wrote:Those of you who are waitlisted and opted in, did you get a confirmation email?
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login