Top Law Schools

Hey folks. My softs are all debate related - graduated in 2010, ranked 2nd in the nation out of 1000 teams, top speaker at a national tournament, quarterfinalist and 5th place at two other national tournaments. This year moved to a different school to coach, coached a team to win both national titles on our circuit. No URM, no upward trend, debate was basically a 40-hour a week job.

Looking at the bottom of the t14, and basically all the t1 cali schools save stanford and boalt. have no desire to live or practice law in the midwest. thoughts?

Zephyd wrote:Hey folks. My softs are all debate related - graduated in 2010, ranked 2nd in the nation out of 1000 teams, top speaker at a national tournament, quarterfinalist and 5th place at two other national tournaments. This year moved to a different school to coach, coached a team to win both national titles on our circuit. No URM, no upward trend, debate was basically a 40-hour a week job.

Looking at the bottom of the t14, and basically all the t1 cali schools save stanford and boalt. have no desire to live or practice law in the midwest. thoughts?

I think probably your only t14 shot is Northwestern ED, but NW is in the Midwest unless you're willing to make an exception. And the rumor is most UC schools are really gpa focused.

bostonlawchick wrote:

Zephyd wrote:Hey folks. My softs are all debate related - graduated in 2010, ranked 2nd in the nation out of 1000 teams, top speaker at a national tournament, quarterfinalist and 5th place at two other national tournaments. This year moved to a different school to coach, coached a team to win both national titles on our circuit. No URM, no upward trend, debate was basically a 40-hour a week job.

Looking at the bottom of the t14, and basically all the t1 cali schools save stanford and boalt. have no desire to live or practice law in the midwest. thoughts?

I think probably your only t14 shot is Northwestern ED, but NW is in the Midwest unless you're willing to make an exception. And the rumor is most UC schools are really gpa focused.

But going to school at NW doesn't mean he will end up living and working in the Midwest so he shouldn't have any reason why not to like Northwestern

word on the street is that you have to live in the midwest to attend NW

OP: Consider Lewis & Clark's Northwestern School of Law if you want to attend Northwestern but don't want to live in the Midwest.

Zephyd wrote:Hey folks. My softs are all debate related - graduated in 2010, ranked 2nd in the nation out of 1000 teams, top speaker at a national tournament, quarterfinalist and 5th place at two other national tournaments. This year moved to a different school to coach, coached a team to win both national titles on our circuit. No URM, no upward trend, debate was basically a 40-hour a week job.

Looking at the bottom of the t14, and basically all the t1 cali schools save stanford and boalt. have no desire to live or practice law in the midwest. thoughts?

Worse GPA, decently better LSAT, non-URM with WE here, but I'm not a master debater or anything. I applied to everyone on the west coast in the top 50 except for S and B and Hastings and struck out, plus I struck out at USD. So I recommend having a backup plan other than California, and going much deeper into the 51-100 schools than I did.

Otherwise, all of your best options are in the midwest I'm afraid. If you really want a coastal school, I'd apply VERY widely and prepare to come off some waitlists. Start honing your LOCI skills.

Couldnt debate your way out of the low gpa, eh?

Would you say you're a master debater?

fanmingrui wrote:Would you say you're a master debater?

Someone already made that joke, with much more subtlety.

Schools in California are GPA focused AND the job market in California for JDs is perhaps the worst in the country right now. Those facts don't sit well together. There's an interesting thread in the Legal Employment forum about a decently ranked UCLA grad who had to move back to MN to live with her parents.

If you aren't willing to move to the Midwest, you don't want to be a lawyer enough to make the risk worthwhile.

NU

AntipodeanPhil wrote:

fanmingrui wrote:Would you say you're a master debater?

Someone already made that joke, with much more subtlety.

Schools in California are GPA focused AND the job market in California for JDs is perhaps the worst in the country right now. Those facts don't sit well together. There's an interesting thread in the Legal Employment forum about a decently ranked UCLA grad who had to move back to MN to live with her parents.

If you aren't willing to move to the Midwest, you don't want to be a lawyer enough to make the risk worthwhile.

Either more subtly or accidentally.

The only T1 on the pacific you even have a chance at is UC Hastings. But you'll be paying sticker, and it's a long shot. ASU and U of A are probably good targets. Uni of Colorado might be a good target too. Brigham Young doesn't seem to have anyone apply below 3.3 damn those hard working Mormons.

Go East young man.

Zephyd wrote:Hey folks. My softs are all debate related - graduated in 2010, ranked 2nd in the nation out of 1000 teams, top speaker at a national tournament, quarterfinalist and 5th place at two other national tournaments. This year moved to a different school to coach, coached a team to win both national titles on our circuit. No URM, no upward trend, debate was basically a 40-hour a week job.

Looking at the bottom of the t14, and basically all the t1 cali schools save stanford and boalt. have no desire to live or practice law in the midwest. thoughts?

What kind of debate?

Unless its policy and you won the NDT, dont expect a huge bump.

Mce252 wrote:

AntipodeanPhil wrote:

fanmingrui wrote:Would you say you're a master debater?

Someone already made that joke, with much more subtlety.
Either more subtly or accidentally.

Accidentally? Child please.

Bumi wrote:

Mce252 wrote:

AntipodeanPhil wrote:

fanmingrui wrote:Would you say you're a master debater?

Someone already made that joke, with much more subtlety.
Either more subtly or accidentally.

Accidentally? Child please.

Haha...just saying. Someone on another forum mentioned how they needed to think long and hard about their decision between two schools - and it was completely serious.

Many debaters become lawyers. If you can, use your debate connections; there may be a donor with ties to either the school you debate at or the school you coach at who could get your application a little extra attention.

UVA ED?

flexityflex86 wrote:UVA ED?

Unlikely. UVa has been cracking down on low GPAs recently. OP's best T14 bet is getting 1-2 years work experience and NU ED (assuming that their new dean keeps the policy of being okay with low GPAs, so it may not even be guaranteed).

All the T1 CA schools will be out for OP (UCD/UCH/USC/UCLA). Maybe UCI will be an option since I don't know much about their admissions. OP's best top T1 bets will be in the midwest (Illinois/WUSTL/IUB/UMN/etc) and possibly GW.

hdivschool wrote:Many debaters become lawyers. If you can, use your debate connections; there may be a donor with ties to either the school you debate at or the school you coach at who could get your application a little extra attention.

this is absurd.

FuManChusco wrote:

hdivschool wrote:Many debaters become lawyers. If you can, use your debate connections; there may be a donor with ties to either the school you debate at or the school you coach at who could get your application a little extra attention.

this is absurd.

I don't think donors have a factor in who gets admitted except for people they directly recommend.

It's possible a really successful African American alumni might say, here's a million to give in scholarships to African American students who are admitted, but I doubt they'd say, "give this to debaters" - you'd really have to be pretty darn passionate about debating. I would also imagine that many law school applicants who did great on the LSAT would be great debaters, but never participated on a team and will be later in life. Debating isn't like picking up a basketball - not everyone gets to examine these skills early in life.

FuManChusco wrote:

hdivschool wrote:Many debaters become lawyers. If you can, use your debate connections; there may be a donor with ties to either the school you debate at or the school you coach at who could get your application a little extra attention.

this is absurd.

I'm not saying it's dispositive, only that it's a potential factor worth exploring. It may sound absurd, but it's not; it's only unlikely. Certain recommenders are likely to carry more weight than others. Connections one makes through debate may include these recommenders, because they include important alumni, donors, faculty members, etc. Top college debate programs recruit talent - they've developed mechanisms for working with admissions offices, mechanisms that may translate into helping the OP. While these connections aren't going to turn a rejection into an admission, they might, on the margin, turn a rejection into a waitlist or a waitlist into an admission. A higher GPA or LSAT would be better, but ultimately you use any resource you have.

flexityflex86 wrote: I don't think donors have a factor in who gets admitted except for people they directly recommend.

It's possible a really successful African American alumni might say, here's a million to give in scholarships to African American students who are admitted, but I doubt they'd say, "give this to debaters" - you'd really have to be pretty darn passionate about debating. I would also imagine that many law school applicants who did great on the LSAT would be great debaters, but never participated on a team and will be later in life. Debating isn't like picking up a basketball - not everyone gets to examine these skills early in life.

I know relatively little about admissions, but I believe you're right about the direct recommendation bit.

There are plenty of people who are very passionate about debating. I don't mean debating as a skill, but as a high level collegiate competitive activity. Very few people compete on the level at which the OP has excelled. This sort of intense competition often builds a strong connection to the activity. Prestigious organizations give preference to people who have succeeded at debate in college (see CSIS:http://globaldebateblog.blogspot.com/20 ... ional.html; and RAND: http://globaldebateblog.blogspot.com/20 ... rgets.html).

I don't know of any law schools that show similar preference. While I know many debaters at top law schools, they were all otherwise qualified for admission.

You may be a top debater,

but I am a master debater.


ETA: It's a good soft, but it won't do much to overcome that GPA or yours. Consider an ED to NU or UVA. Note that neither of these schools is likely to bite.

OP is vastly overvaluing the importance of debate here.

Yea, I don't care if you're Will Ferrell vs. James Carville in Old School, it's still not going to compensate for your sub 3.0 GPA

hdivschool wrote:

FuManChusco wrote:

hdivschool wrote:Many debaters become lawyers. If you can, use your debate connections; there may be a donor with ties to either the school you debate at or the school you coach at who could get your application a little extra attention.

this is absurd.

I'm not saying it's dispositive, only that it's a potential factor worth exploring. It may sound absurd, but it's not; it's only unlikely.

I know relatively little about admissions, but I believe you're right about the direct recommendation bit.

There are plenty of people who are very passionate about debating. I don't mean debating as a skill, but as a high level collegiate competitive activity. Very few people compete on the level at which the OP has excelled. This sort of intense competition often builds a strong connection to the activity. Prestigious organizations give preference to people who have succeeded at debate in college (see CSIS:http://globaldebateblog.blogspot.com/20 ... ional.html; and RAND: http://globaldebateblog.blogspot.com/20 ... rgets.html).

I don't know of any law schools that show similar preference. While I know many debaters at top law schools, they were all otherwise qualified for admission.

Yes, all this possible, but incredibly unlikely, as you state. Your argument works equally well for any college activity. (You did mock trial? Many lawyers did mock trial! Perhaps you should network with attorneys who also did mock trial! You played football in college? Very few people compete on the level at which you excelled at football! This sort of intense competition often builds a strong connection to the activity! etc. etc.)

Sometimes, it's better just to admit that you spoke too quickly rather than try to cover up the scent of bullshit with more bullshit. There's no reason to believe that having debate will allow OP to outperform his numbers. In fact, your point that many law applicants and lawyers have debate experience would suggest just the opposite-if it's not unique then why is it a good soft?

Edited for quote shrinking.