Estrich's guide vs. Ivey's guide?

Graduate School Law School
1

<p>The first law school admissions guide I read was Ivey's Law School Admissions guide, which I felt was very informative, candid, and simple. Then the other day at Borders, I flipped through a book called How to Get Into Law School, written by USC (former Harvard) professor Susan Estrich. Although I felt she enjoyed doing a lot of name dropping (Eliot Spitzer, Ann Coulter, etc.) the book offered a much more intense picture of what it takes to get into a top law school. To anyone who has read both guides, which do you feel is a more accurate picture of what it takes to get into a top law school?</p>

<p>After reading Ivey, I feel like I'm doing well to prepare for Harvard (top choice) or NYU (second choice). But after reading Estrich, I feel like I'm nowhere near "exceptional" enough.</p>

<p>Here's what (hopefully) my stats will look like when I'm graduating</p>

<p>NYU - Stern, Economics (and maybe finance)
GPA - 3.9ish (currently a 3.965)
LSAT- 170range</p>

<p>Honors: Honor Key (two consecutive years on Dean's List), Omicron Delta Epsilon (Economics honors, need to write thesis), Beta Gamma Sigma (top 7 or 10% of junior or senior class, respectively), Stern Scholar</p>

<p>Activities: Mock Trial (president, captain), Stern Student Council/Student Senators Council (University Senator - 1 from each school + 4 senators at large make up NYU Student Senators Council)</p>

<p>Community Service: The GO Project (tutoring elementary school kids on Saturday mornings in math and reading), little projects here and there for Scholars</p>

<p>Work: work study jobs (Dean's Office, stuff like that), internship at large Eastern Pennsylvania law firm/investment bank, probably an internship in NYC, although I'm not sure doing what yet.</p>

<p>Are stats like these good enough for HLS (which according to Ivey, I feel like they are), or do I need to go save a third world country and/or rebuild the Bronx (Estrich)? And for those who may take this too seriously (as I am probably doing right now) that last comment was a joke. Thanks for your help.</p>

2

<p>The single best thing you can do is get a higher LSAT score.</p>

3

<p>You will be "competitive." Keep in mind though, that there will be probably a couple thousand "competitive applicants." Do't forget to apply to at least one good match, and one safety. Best of luck!</p>

<p>P.S. If you feel that you can, or have the potential to, contribute to "saving" a third world -developing or underdeveloped are far more appropriate terms- country and don't do it, well, I, at least, would be happy to reject you. :)</p>

4

<p>so what i'm taking away from this is that law school is not as numbers driven as i initially thought it was?</p>

5

<p>
[quote]
Are stats like these good enough for HLS (which according to Ivey, I feel like they are), or do I need to go save a third world country and/or rebuild the Bronx (Estrich)? And for those who may take this too seriously (as I am probably doing right now) that last comment was a joke. Thanks for your help.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I do not understand. What kind of absurdly-high demand does Estrich establish? Your record is ostensibly competitive for the likes of Harvard and Yale, what more does she want?</p>

6

<p>Here are some of her quotes which I found...interesting to say the least. I will let you judge for yourself:</p>

<p>"Do extra-curricular activities matter?"
"No one seems to care unless you don't have them. The exception is community service. Don't even think of applying if you haven't done it. Especially if you're a rich kid. Don't quote me on it [oops] but it's true. And don't just tell me you went down to the soup kitchen every year and volunteered with your family. This is not enough."</p>

<p>...continued on next page:</p>

<p>"AM I SAYING THAT JUST GOING TO SCHOOL FOR FOUR YEARS AND GETTING GOOD GRADES ISN'T ENOUGH?"
"Yes. That is exactly what I am saying. that is not enough. Big Brother? Big Sister? How about organizing a new chapter, or rescuing one? How about establishing a statewide program? Okay, citywide? The issue is not simply that you did it, but that you did it with intensity and commitment. That you were a leader. It's a measure of character. So is its absence.
The more privileged you are, the more it's expected. Unless you're an art major, I wouldn't make it the art-museum variety. I'd really look at the community you're in, and try to connect what you do to why you're pursuing a career as a lawyer."</p>

<p>WHAT DO LAW SCHOOLS LOOK FOR IN PEOPLE WHO HAVE WORKED?
[taken out of context yes, but i'ts long] "Most important, though, is leaderhsip. What happened at the ski school? did you change the way they teach the kids? Then it works fine. If you waitress, organize a union, change the way they structure hours...make a difference.
I know what made my class at Harvard feel special. It was, first and foremost, the people in it. They were chosen for where they were going, and that is determined not only from the numbers, but from what you see in essays, activities, and work experience. You're looking for people who rise to the top of in whatever situation they're put in, people who stand out, make change happen, make a difference. If they get fired, it's because they stood up."</p>

<p>Most of the other stuff is pretty "duh." Get good grades, do well on LSATs, know your profs and get good recs. But there's other interesting stuff like "Getting an interview at a law school that does not interview" which she claims is very important.</p>

7

<p>How would the law school know "how privileged you are," except if you write an essay about being underprivileged?</p>

8

<p>
[quote]
How would the law school know "how privileged you are," except if you write an essay about being underprivileged?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Perhaps because some schools may be need-aware, though I am unsure of whether such a policy is commonplace in top five law school admissions.</p>

9

<p>The book cited above suggests that, contrary to many posts on these boards, it's not just a numbers game. I must say, I had a pretty good handle on undergrad admissions (thanks to cc) but I am still pretty bewildered re law school. If it is true it's just numbers (i.e., they just skim the 4.0 students off the top), then a student -- unless at a highly inflated school -- would need to put his or her leadership skills on the back burner and instead spend the day in the library. That just doesn't sit right with me. And certainly not with my d.</p>

10

<p>aparent5, it's not JUST numbers, but numbers are much better predictors of where you'll get into law school than they are in college admissions.</p>

<p>My experience, in particular, with kids who got into Yale Law was that they tended to be leaders with interesting stories as WELL as superstar scholars. At Harvard Law, there's a good mix of 3.98/177's who are mainly academics-focused and 3.8/170's who were very active in community service or politics. Yale and Stanford are pretty much the only schools where numbers above a certain threshold don't virtually guarantee acceptance.</p>

<p>The idea that "you shouldn't even think of applying" unless you have community service on your record is total bunk. If you have a 3.95/178 from Princeton, you're getting into Columbia, and probably Harvard as well, even if you never left your dorm room. I didn't do community service in college (I did only performing arts and transfer mentoring), and I got into all of YHS with stats close to the YLS mean.</p>