<p>I've gone through countless websites ranking the top law schools, and I've seen the Princeton Review rankings but I wanted to know if anyone out there had an opinion to offer about what law schools have the best environment/quality of life. I want to go to a law school that is challenging but I also want to go to a place where students form tight-knit groups to help each other out and aren't overly competitive. Suggestions?</p>
<p>I think Michigan fits the bill. The dean of admissions says she really seeks out "nice people," there's a bowling league and other laid-back stuff to do, and Ann Arbor has a low cost of living and a student-centered lifestyle. Since there are enough jobs (even enough BigLaw jobs) for everyone who wants one to get one, and since people are going to such a wide range of cities after graduation, it never feels like you're fighting your classmates for a job. People don't really talk about their grades (I have no clue what my class rank is).</p>
<p>I've also heard a lot of good things about UVA in this regard. And I'd assume that schools with honors/pass/fail grading like Yale and Stanford are somewhat similar. If you can get an awesome job with all passes, it really cuts down on the stress (of course there will always be some people who are really pushing to get honors, but you don't have to be one of them unless you want to be!)</p>
<p>My college's president, a Yale law grad, said that William & Mary had the happiest, most content students she'd ever seen at any law school. Things I've read about the school seem to corroborate the observation.</p>
<p>I've heard good things about Berkeley, generally credited to a combo of weather, generous grading curve (without traditional grades), and relatively high % going into public service. At an admitted students event, a lot of people who'd been 'making the rounds' of top schools commented on the relatively friendly, laid-back atmosphere. </p>
<p>Can't speak firsthand, sorry.</p>
<p>W&M Law softball team was always tough to beat.</p>
<p>From my observations, I would say Stanford has the most content student body in the T14. Although I only visited 6 schools in all, the very small class size, sunny weather, and proximity of San Francisco made Palo Alto seem a much more appealing place to spend three years than Ann Arbor, Chicago, or even Cambridge. Although the whole "no grade" thing is kind of a farce at all the schools who tout it, even people who admitted to graduating at the bottom of their class at Stanford seemed to have amazing career prospects. Then again, I'm a bit biased...I'm just putting forward what helped me make up my mind. </p>
<p>Of course weather and cultural preferences are very relevant in making this determination. If you like beer and softball, I don't think you can find a better home than UVA. Similarly, If you seek a more mature student body and enjoy blustering winters, than Northwestern would likely be preferable to all alternatives...</p>
<p>i attended YLS - quite a few years ago -- but they had the Honors/Pass/Low Pass/Fail grading system then -- with all first semester classes being Pass/Fail. in general -- the atmosphere was pretty relaxed compared to what you were led to believe law school would be like -- the movie The Paper Chase bore absolutely no resemblance to what our law school experience was like. there was a general sense that we'd all end up just fine in the job market -- firms that normally wouldn't hire first years as summer associates would hire YLS first years as a way of trying to get us longterm.</p>
<p>BUT even in this ideal atmosphere -- the truth was -- there was still a lot of stress and pressure -- mostly internally driven. Think about it -- you take all these people who got to where they are by being the top at whatever schools they came from undergrad and you throw them all together. people don't just stop being intense because you tell them their first classes are pass/fail. some people had no problem chilling out into the YLS grades aren't that important mentality (grades weren't even used for Law Journal -- you got onto Journal by writing) -- but many were simply very driven (ie the type of person that is often attracted to law school). not that there was anything cut throat at all -- just that you were surrounded by a lot of people who could be pretty intense.</p>
<p>also -- even though there wasn't a great sense of competition for law firm jobs -- there was still a sense that you had to be the best of the best to get the top law clerkships - federal circuit court, very desirable district courts, and of course Supreme Court. wherever you go, there will be some types of jobs that are considered more difficult to get -- the level of that will vary by school, but there will always be some "prize" that some of your fellow students will be striving for -- if that is the same "prize" you are looking for, it is easier to end up feeling that there is a sense of "competition" no matter how friendly and supportive everyone may be about it.</p>
<p>so realize -- no matter how student friendly and supportive a law school is -- by definition, it is law school -- and the personalities of many of the students will simply lend itself to a pretty intense atmosphere. realize also -- if you can't handle that, you should probably reconsider whether being a lawyer is for you since those are the same types of people you will be working with.</p>
<p>It was always my impression that UVA and Penn have very collegial and supportive atmospheres.</p>
<p>I've heard great things about UCLA, mostly because of the weather and their generous grading curve, which makes the competition a bit less cutthroat.</p>
<p>Although I am not in LS I would have to venture as to say that the best atmosphere is where people aren't going insane to get the highest grades. So, imo, I am personally leaning towards looking at the Berkeleys, Yales, and now Stanford. I know this isnt the only factor in determining school with a good quality of life, but it is definitely something to think about.</p>
<p>From a friend at Boalt: </p>
<p>The reason H/P/F is not translated A/B/F at Yale (e.g. why don't employers just count H's?) is because the H is very rare and arbitrary. If a lot of professors don't even give them, then counting H's isn't very useful. A student with three fewer H's might just be taking classes from profs who just don't give H's. Course-to-course variability is so extreme that it becomes a useless metric -- grades, in other words, really don't tell employers anything. Since they know that, they don't bother.</p>
<p>H's are given pretty regularly at Berkeley, making them the equivalent of an A. Course-to-course variability exists, of course, but no more so than an A/B/F system would have. Employers therefore CAN read H/P/F grades by counting H's, and grades at Boalt do indeed matter just as much as they would in a letter-grade system.</p>
<p>This is true that Berkeley's grading system is more representative of a traditional one than that of Yale, but I still have trouble believing that the competition generated by the Boalt system of grades is like that of other schools where there are possibilities of +/-'s. </p>
<p>I may be looking at this wrong, but any reasonably hard-working student should expect either and H or P in a Boalt course, whereas at many other law schools, the opportunites are much wider ranging from A,A-,B+,B, etc.</p>